Batter Interference

We had a discussion of this very topic in this forum a week or so ago. 

The batter may not interfere with the catcher's fielding or throwing by:

a. Leaning over home plate,

b. Stepping out of the batter's box,

c. Making any other movement, including follow-through interference, which hinders actions at home plate or the catcher's attempt to play on a runner, or

d.  Failing to make a reasonable effort to vacate a congested area when there is a throw to home plate and there is time for the batter to move away.

Your description sounds like interference under "c."

One way your coach might have handled this situation would have been to ask the plate umpire, "So you agree that the batter did step back into the catcher's way, but you are saying the rules permit the batter to hinder the catcher's attempt to make a play on the runner as long as he stays in the box?" 

This question clarifies the issue as a rule application and not a judgment call. It should make the umpire reconsider. If not, it gives the coach an opportunity to ask him to consult with his partner on the rule, or to protest if they don't get it right.

A lot of times coaches miss opportunities to get mistakes fixed by reacting to the play with "Are you kidding me?" or "That's terrible!" when their interests would be better served by asking well phrased questions that clarify the situation.

As an umpire, I have a big problem with umpires expressing disagreement with a partner's call to anyone other than the partner--in private, either in a conference during the game or in the post-game de-brief in the parking lot.  

We all make mistakes. And sometimes we see our partners make mistakes that we don't get an opportunity to help correct. For example, if my partner misses a pulled foot at first base, I can't share that information with him unless the coach asks him and he asks me.

The best thing to do in these situations is to stay quiet.

The worst thing to do is undermine the partner without helping him by sharing opinions with coaches, players, or spectators.

Okay, I understand the rules regarding batter interference (BI) for the most part. I just have a few questions. So, if BI occurs when the batter swings & misses for strike 3, is the runner that's stealing 2nd automatically out since the batter is already out for striking out?? OR is the runner out ONLY if, in the umpire's judgment, the BI prevented the defense from getting the out at 2nd base?? In other words, does it matter what the count is after BI has been called when determining if the runner should also be out at 2nd base OR send the runner back to 1st?? I'm thinking the count shouldn't matter and the runner is also out if the BI was the reason why the defense didn't throw out the runner at 2nd, and send the runner back to 1st base if even though there was BI, there was no chance (in umpire's judgment) the defense was going to throw out the runner. Is what I just stated true?? I guess what I'm dying to know is when do we (umpires) determine if the runner needs to return to the base occupied at the time of the pitch, and when do we (umpires) determine if the runner who is stealing should also be ruled out. Please help me with this scenario, thanks!! Also, when BI occurs when the runner at 3rd is attempting to steal home, the runner is automatically out and the batter remains at bat. (As long as 3 strikes have NOT been called AND the runner trying to steal home is the 1st or 2nd out of the inning.)  Correct???  I know if there are 2 outs and BI is called, then the batter is out and the inning is over. What if there is 1 out, runner on 3rd is stealing home, and the batter swings and misses for strike 3 and the batter's follow through swing hits the catcher and the umpire calls batter interference. Is this an automatic double play or does the runner still need to be tagged to be ruled out? Lastly, when batter interference is called, when should the umpire call time to stop play? Should we treat it as a delayed dead ball? I say delayed dead ball because if the catcher throws out the runner attempting to steal a base, the batter interference is ignored. Sorry for writing a book over this, but I'd appreciate any feedback. 

Meff posted:

Okay, I understand the rules regarding batter interference (BI) for the most part. I just have a few questions. So, if BI occurs when the batter swings & misses for strike 3, is the runner that's stealing 2nd automatically out since the batter is already out for striking out?? OR is the runner out ONLY if, in the umpire's judgment, the BI prevented the defense from getting the out at 2nd base?? In other words, does it matter what the count is after BI has been called when determining if the runner should also be out at 2nd base OR send the runner back to 1st?? I'm thinking the count shouldn't matter and the runner is also out if the BI was the reason why the defense didn't throw out the runner at 2nd, and send the runner back to 1st base if even though there was BI, there was no chance (in umpire's judgment) the defense was going to throw out the runner. Is what I just stated true?? I guess what I'm dying to know is when do we (umpires) determine if the runner needs to return to the base occupied at the time of the pitch, and when do we (umpires) determine if the runner who is stealing should also be ruled out. Please help me with this scenario, thanks!! Also, when BI occurs when the runner at 3rd is attempting to steal home, the runner is automatically out and the batter remains at bat. (As long as 3 strikes have NOT been called AND the runner trying to steal home is the 1st or 2nd out of the inning.)  Correct???  I know if there are 2 outs and BI is called, then the batter is out and the inning is over. What if there is 1 out, runner on 3rd is stealing home, and the batter swings and misses for strike 3 and the batter's follow through swing hits the catcher and the umpire calls batter interference. Is this an automatic double play or does the runner still need to be tagged to be ruled out? Lastly, when batter interference is called, when should the umpire call time to stop play? Should we treat it as a delayed dead ball? I say delayed dead ball because if the catcher throws out the runner attempting to steal a base, the batter interference is ignored. Sorry for writing a book over this, but I'd appreciate any feedback. 

It's easier to keep straight if you remember two things:

1) Batter interference is a delayed dead ball. Let the play unfold, so you can compare what does happen to what would have happened. This also gives you time to watch and think.

2) Your goal is to nullify the interference, which is not the same as punishing the team that committed the interference.  They don't get to keep any ill-gotten gains, either in the form bases advanced or outs avoided. 

In your first situation of a batter interfering after swinging and missing on strike 3 while a runner is attempting to steal second, the batter is already out because he struck out.  Let the play unfold. If the runner is put out, the ball remains live. If the runner is not put out, kill the play and decide whether to return the runner to first (if you think he would have stolen the base without the interference) or call him out (if you think he would have been out). 

If the interference prevented a double play, get the second out. If it didn't prevent a double play, return the runner. How do you tell? If it's a good pitch to handle and the runner has no better than a normal jump, I'll get the second out. If it's a hard pitch to handle and the runner has a noticeably good jump, I'll return him. In between, I do the best I can. Again, the goal is nullification, not punishment.

In your second scenario of a runner stealing home, the runner is out unless there are already two out. If there are already two outs, the batter is out. If the runner is put out, the ball remains alive.

Does this help?

Yes.......it does help.......A LOT!! Thanks! One more question....... What if there is 1 out, runner on 3rd is stealing home, and the batter swings and misses for strike 3 and the batter's follow through swing hits the catcher and the umpire calls batter interference. Is this an automatic double play? If no, why not? I ask because if the batter has less than 3 strikes after BI is called, the runner is out if he is put out and the runner is still out even if he is not put out. Correct?? So, if the batter has 3 strikes after BI is called, why would the defense need to tag him? You understand why I'm sort of confused about this specific situation? Again, your feedback is greatly appreciated Swampboy!!

Even though the situation is implausible, the same principles apply.

It is still a delayed dead ball, so don't call interference until the dust settles.

If it's a third strike, the batter is already out. (If the pitch wasn't caught and first base was unoccupied, you can call the batter out for interference, and it won't affect how you dispose of the runner.)

If the interference prevented the catcher from retiring the runner, rule the runner out.

If the runner would have scored even if the batter had not committed interference (which would make this scenario even more implausible, but, hey, it's baseball: anything can happen), send him (and any other runners) back.

Remember, you're not punishing the team for interference, you are nullifying the interference.

Swampboy posted:

In your first situation of a batter interfering after swinging and missing on strike 3 while a runner is attempting to steal second, the batter is already out because he struck out.  Let the play unfold. If the runner is put out, the ball remains live. If the runner is not put out, kill the play and decide whether to return the runner to first (if you think he would have stolen the base without the interference) or call him out (if you think he would have been out). 

If the interference prevented a double play, get the second out. If it didn't prevent a double play, return the runner. How do you tell? If it's a good pitch to handle and the runner has no better than a normal jump, I'll get the second out. If it's a hard pitch to handle and the runner has a noticeably good jump, I'll return him. In between, I do the best I can. Again, the goal is nullification, not punishment.

 

Swampboy's post applies only in FED.  Under NCAA and OBR, the runner is out no matter how you judge the steal attempt.

And, FWIW, I have a higher standard before returning the runner that how I interpret Swampboy's standard.  A guideline would be to get the out unless R1 is stealing on the pitch and the ball gets away from F2.  If F2 has any kind of a play on R1, get the out.

Finally, the rule on the "follow-through interference" is also different between FED (it's just another kind of BI) and NCAA / OBR (it's "weak interference" and return the runner unless the runner is retired on the play).