Batter interference?

absolutely the batter can interfere.....the batters box only gives him limited protection....

lunging at the pitch is not interference, but walking backwards into the catcher can be....

NFHS Rule 7-3-Art 5
A batter shall not interfere with the catchers fielding or throwing by making any other movement which hinders actions at home plate or the catchers attempt to play on a runner.....

Call the batter out and return the runner......

The umpire said that it wasn't intenetional so he didn't call it. Does it have to be?

quote:

Originally posted by Tangents23:
The umpire said that it wasn't intenetional so he didn't call it. Does it have to be?

No, it does not.

quote:

Originally posted by Jimmy03:

quote:

Originally posted by Tangents23:
The umpire said that it wasn't intenetional so he didn't call it. Does it have to be?

No, it does not.

agree 100% and I would offer that probably most interference is unintentional.......

I have seen a lot of intentional interference that was intended to look unintentional. Can't fool me!

Something similiar happened in a game yesterday. Batter swings at pitch, runner on 1st is stealing, batter steps on plate restricting catcher's ability to throw. No call. Should catcher point it out to ump?

No he shouldnt.....its not his job...he plays the game....the head coach is the only person to bring anything to the umpires

situation: 2 men on base 1st and 2nd, Batter swings hits ball and then throws bat hitting the catcher and breaking his left forearm(taking him out of the game)ball is thrown home to make play on runner but catcher cannot make play due to injury, is batter deemed out for NFHS rule 7-3-art 5 for interfering with catchers fielding?
Thanks

piaa_ump

I respectfully disagree-- I want my players picking things up--they can open the conversation and the coach will be right behind him to continue

Piaa_ump I have a slight difference of oppinion on players talking about situations with the umpires. I am one of very few coaches in my area that establishes a captain before every game. I always select my starting catcher as my captain. There are a few situations where I will have
my catcher request time and discuss a play with the umpire. This is one of the situations where I would have my catcher do this. I always have him talk in questions listen to the answers and continue until he is satisfied with the answer. This very rarely happens but I feel it helps build a better sense of the rules and a better rapport with the umpires he is working with. Fortunately it has been well received by the majority of umpires that work with us.

It is possible for a catcher to ask about BI but most will not do it right so is suggested that they don't.

From Bill Lintner:

quote:

situation: 2 men on base 1st and 2nd, Batter swings hits ball and then throws bat hitting the catcher and breaking his left forearm(taking him out of the game)ball is thrown home to make play on runner but catcher cannot make play due to injury, is batter deemed out for NFHS rule 7-3-art 5 for interfering with catchers fielding?
Thanks

Under Fed rules the batter is responsible for his follow through after his attempt to hit the ball so yes, he can be guilty of interference as you described.

TR /Coach Rudy....

I see your points and I have no issues with discussing the situation or rules with catchers and would engage your catcher with my thoughts.....I was more speaking of any disagreement or arguement over my call or non call....

It is not in the players/teams best interest for them to intitiate an argument.....thats the head coaches job....

quote:

Originally posted by crudy:
... There are a few situations where I will have
my catcher request time and discuss a play with the umpire. ... I always have him talk in questions listen to the answers and continue until he's satisfied with the answer ......it helps build a better sense of the rules and a better rapport with the umpires he is working with.

A question from a catcher ONLY happens when his team didnt get the call...continued questioning until satisfied? will always hurt any rapport F2 is trying to build and could result in an ejection.

A "better sense" of the rules is a coaches job, not a working umpire, and just sounds like coachspeak for "I need all the help I can get to make PU change his call"...

Under Fed rules the batter is responsible for his follow through after his attempt to hit the ball so yes, he can be guilty of interference as you described.[/QUOTE]

Thank you for the response, it is greatly appreciated.

Bill L