Batter Interference ?

Since you are an umpire, you know that so much of this is HTBT. (had to be there). Interference is your judgment, thats what we get paid for....

that being said, from your post, I would agree with your call of no interference. The batters box only offers the batter a limited amount of protection from interference. You are correct in using my favorite statement, "the batter can not disappear"..so the catcher must make the play around the batter....

Here is where it gets tricky.....interference does not have to be intentional as a matter of fact some of the "worst cases" I've ever called was on batters who were trying to get out of the way of the catcher....

If the better "seems" to line up to block a throw.....and you believe it to be intentional...then call it....when Skip wants to know why you called interference keep your explanation short.......

Umpire: "batter moved to hinder the throw"...

hope this helps

If the ball is caught or is within reach of the catcher the batter may stay where he is but he can't move around to create an obstuction. Even if he satys in the box he can be guilty of interference. This does not have to intentional.

"Even if he stays ..."

Very interesting. Could you explain in a little more detail.

Thanks!

The batter is allowed to swing at the pitch. If the R2 is stealing then he can't just disappear so the catcher has to pick a path to throw. Most pick behind the batter. He knows where the batter is when he makes his swing so the F2 can assume that path is clear for him to throw. If the batter takes a step back, even in the box, and interferes then it's a BI and the batter is out, runner returns. I've never really had to call this but I have seen it called against Billy Ripkin in a game one night. It didn't look intentional but he got banged anyway.

The best thing a batter can do here is not to move. If he stays in the box and does nothing deliberate, 99 times/100 he's not going to be called for Interference.

The Catcher is supposed to know how to throw around a unmoving batter, and so the PU isnt going to reward the defense for an incompetent Catcher if he cant.

Now, if the batter backs up (trying to clear the plate, for ex) and ends up in the way of the Catcher apparently unintentionally......there you get to earn the big dollars as PU and make a decision

LonBlue67,
I would actually go on to say if the better does not move at all I will NEVER, EVER, call BI. I agree with all of the above postings, but I just wanted to see if others share this particular opinion that I have.

Another question in regard to BI...
I week or so ago I went through all of the batter/runner out scenarios. I know there is a scenario where the batter swings and his momentum carries him over into the path of the catcher (this mostly happens with R1 stealing second), I know that in this case, a normal BI has the batter out, but I remember seeing a case when his momentum carries him that the runner may be out...but I'm not sure.

The case is, if the Batter does that on a missed Strike 3 and is out for his miss, then the runner being played on is out as well for the Batter's Interference - double play, in effect.