If the batter swings the bat and his follow through hits the catcher's mitt, is it considered catcher interference?
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
I'm curious to hear some responses to this question. We had this exact call made against us in a tournament recently.
NO, it is not catcher's interference UNLESS, it is deemed absolutely without a doubt intentional. It is simply a dead ball, and if runners were going, I would send them back. But I look at this like the rule regarding a broken bat hitting a ball the "common sense would dictate that this is not something someone can control." Unless it is obvious, this is something that I do not think a batter can control.
johntaine21, I think you are confusing rules. Intent has absolutely no bearing on the call.
In any case, in the sitch posted by ritz, there is no interference call, no dead ball because any defensive interference must hinder a batter from hitting a pitch. Therefore contact on follow-through does not qualify.
The reason intent isn't required is because any contact on the swing by the catcher can possibly alter the result of a batter's swing. i.e. with 2 strikes, interfered with clean miss could have been a foul ball. And there is no way to judge what could have happened.
See the rules:
2.00
INTERFERENCE
(b) Defensive interference is an act by a fielder which hinders or prevents a batter from hitting a pitch.
On any interference the ball is dead.
6.08
The batter becomes a runner and is entitled to first base without liability to be put out (provided he advances to and touches first base) when --
(c) The catcher or any fielder interferes with him. If a play follows the interference, the manager of the offense may advise the plate umpire that he elects to decline the interference penalty and accept the play. Such election shall be made immediately at the end of the play. However, if the batter reaches first base on a hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batsman, or otherwise, and all other runners advance at least one base, the play proceeds without reference to the interference.
Rule 6.08(c) Comment: If catcher’s interference is called with a play in progress the umpire will allow the play to continue because the manager may elect to take the play. If the batter-runner missed first base, or a runner misses his next base, he shall be considered as having reached the base, as stated in Note of Rule 7.04(d). Examples of plays the manager might elect to take:
1. Runner on third, one out, batter hits fly ball to the outfield on which the runner scores but catcher’s interference was called. The offensive manager may elect to take the run and have batter called out or have runner remain at third and batter awarded first base.
2. Runner on second base. Catcher interferes with batter as he bunts ball fairly sending runner to third base. The manager may rather have runner on third base with an out on the play than have runners on second and first.
If a runner is trying to score by a steal or squeeze from third base, note the additional penalty set forth in Rule 7.07.
If the catcher interferes with the batter before the pitcher delivers the ball, it shall not be considered interference on the batter under Rule 6.08(c). In such cases, the umpire shall call “Time” and the pitcher and batter start over from “scratch.”
In any case, in the sitch posted by ritz, there is no interference call, no dead ball because any defensive interference must hinder a batter from hitting a pitch. Therefore contact on follow-through does not qualify.
The reason intent isn't required is because any contact on the swing by the catcher can possibly alter the result of a batter's swing. i.e. with 2 strikes, interfered with clean miss could have been a foul ball. And there is no way to judge what could have happened.
See the rules:
2.00
INTERFERENCE
(b) Defensive interference is an act by a fielder which hinders or prevents a batter from hitting a pitch.
On any interference the ball is dead.
6.08
The batter becomes a runner and is entitled to first base without liability to be put out (provided he advances to and touches first base) when --
(c) The catcher or any fielder interferes with him. If a play follows the interference, the manager of the offense may advise the plate umpire that he elects to decline the interference penalty and accept the play. Such election shall be made immediately at the end of the play. However, if the batter reaches first base on a hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batsman, or otherwise, and all other runners advance at least one base, the play proceeds without reference to the interference.
Rule 6.08(c) Comment: If catcher’s interference is called with a play in progress the umpire will allow the play to continue because the manager may elect to take the play. If the batter-runner missed first base, or a runner misses his next base, he shall be considered as having reached the base, as stated in Note of Rule 7.04(d). Examples of plays the manager might elect to take:
1. Runner on third, one out, batter hits fly ball to the outfield on which the runner scores but catcher’s interference was called. The offensive manager may elect to take the run and have batter called out or have runner remain at third and batter awarded first base.
2. Runner on second base. Catcher interferes with batter as he bunts ball fairly sending runner to third base. The manager may rather have runner on third base with an out on the play than have runners on second and first.
If a runner is trying to score by a steal or squeeze from third base, note the additional penalty set forth in Rule 7.07.
If the catcher interferes with the batter before the pitcher delivers the ball, it shall not be considered interference on the batter under Rule 6.08(c). In such cases, the umpire shall call “Time” and the pitcher and batter start over from “scratch.”
quote:If the batter swings the bat and his follow through hits the catcher's mitt, is it considered catcher interference?
Absolutely NOT .......
However it can be Batters interference.......
The NFHS rule says If a batters follow through hinders the catcher attempting to field a ball the batter is guilty of interference. The ball is dead and the runners if any, remain at the bases at the time of the interference.
The ruling states that once a batter swings he is responsible for his follow through.
OBR states that the umpire is to call batters interference on the backswing if the bat contacts the catcher before he has "securely held the ball".....
Lastly a bit of trivial info, batters interfere....catchers obstruct....I know its always called catchers interference, but by rule it is catchers obstruction.....
ZDad,
you are correct, what I was trying to say, but my words obviously did not was that this is not catcher's interference, nor is it batter's interference...however, like piaa said it could be batter's intereference if I, as the umpire, deem that it was intentional...however, after reading piaa's post, this being unintentional/intentional apparently does not matter...my bad...
you are correct, what I was trying to say, but my words obviously did not was that this is not catcher's interference, nor is it batter's interference...however, like piaa said it could be batter's intereference if I, as the umpire, deem that it was intentional...however, after reading piaa's post, this being unintentional/intentional apparently does not matter...my bad...
What PIAA is referring to is called weak interference. Kill the ball, return the runners. It doesn't happen often so it isn't a commonly known ruling.