Dropped 3rd strike - is this interference?

It sounds like the PU got it right. Unless the batter was throwing at the ball or fielsder intentionly then it is as it was called.

ok thanks.

so even though the batter struck out, its ok to throw the bat 10 feet away and have it interfere with the play. his lack of knowledge of the rules had an adverse effect on us and that's ok.

although I'm not questioning your opinion at all, something just doesn't seem right about that..

You are right that this is a HTBT....we cant put ourselves into the umpires shoes.....

MST is right here.....if the umpire adjudged the thrown bat as unintentional then its nothing... play on....

The umpire judges if he feel it was intentional or not.......only his opinion counts.

PIAA and I arre not saying it wasn't a problem, just that it isn't really a rule violation. Unless I am misunderstanding the play, it sounds like he threw the bat to the side as he advanced for first. He was under a mistaken impression that he could try for first. If he did something other than that then explain futher to make us understand what we missed. Because something happens that isn't entirely kousher doesn't make it atoumaticly illegal.

MST-
wouldn't OBR 6.05 I come into affect here?

The rule
The batter is out when.....
After hitting or bunting a foul ball, he intentionally deflects the course of the ball in any manner while running to first base. The ball is dead and no runners may advance;

I can interpret that to mean he deflected the ball by throwing his bat.

quote:

he intentionally deflects the course of the ball in any manner

Not wanting to step on MST's call here but since I agree....

you are partially right on the rule. (no contact in the original post, this is strictly a D3K situation).......

But the real difference is whether or not the umpire judged the thrown bat that struck the ball was an intentional or unintentional act.....

Intentional.....meaning the batter threw the bat at the ball to deflect the course so that the catcher could not get it.........

or

unintentional....meaning the thrown bat contacted the ball with no intent to deflect...play on

This is where we earn our money.....determining intent.....and only our opinion counts..... from the OP the umpires called it unintentional........

hope this helps.

quote:

Originally posted by NJUmp:
MST-
wouldn't OBR 6.05 I come into affect here?

The rule
The batter is out when.....
After hitting or bunting a foul ball, he intentionally deflects the course of the ball in any manner while running to first base. The ball is dead and no runners may advance;

I can interpret that to mean he deflected the ball by throwing his bat.

The fact he deflected the ball with the bat is not an interpretation--its a fact. INTENT is the judgement call here.

Most umpires would have to see absolute intent here..ie, the batter clearly aimed the bat at the ball, etc to call this intentional. This sound unintentional.

The OP has to realize that the defense erred first by his F2 not catching the pitch in the first place. If he had, none of the rest of this would have happened.

Theres no rule that says the batterrunner cant run to First even if hes out by rule--this happens oh, about 10 times a game, and is very common. Its disingenuous for the OP to speak of 'he didnt know the rule and it hurt us.' Im sure his kids do the same thing from time to time, but its ok then. The ball was live, so the advance by R1 to Second was legal and stands.

The PU ruled correctly here, IMO.

I only questioned this because if the ball was fair, they would be out and no runners would advance regardless of intention. I just cant think of a reason why this would not apply to a foul ball.

Rule 7.09
Sounds like this may define what happened.

(d) Any batter or runner who has just been put out hinders or impedes any following play being made on a runner. Such runner shall be declared out for the interference of his teammate;

you are quoting strict OBR. This is a HS site so normally NFHS rules apply.

Look up the official NFHS interp from Rumble that states that interference with the catcher on a D3k must be deliberate before it is penalized.

However if we check in OBR, please see the official interp from PBUC that states that if unintentional the play should be allowed to proceed......

quote:

I just cant think of a reason why this would not apply to a foul ball.

You understand of course that this is not a foul ball........in the OP there was no contact..the batter swung and missed strike 3........the pitch was in the dirt and deflected off the catcher.........

quote:

Originally posted by NJUmp:
Rule 7.09
Sounds like this may define what happened.

(d) Any batter or runner who has just been put out hinders or impedes any following play being made on a runner. Such runner shall be declared out for the interference of his teammate;

no bashing, but this is why one has to understand the totality of the rules, use context, read/use accepted interps, and not cherrypick from one situation to another. piaa-ump is exactly right here. The D3K scenario is one that has a lot of interps pertaining to it.

this is not a foul ball. it is a live ball that happens to be in foul territory.

Some are trying to use batted ball rules on a D3K situation. It was even mentioned that if the ball had been in fair it would be an out. This is not true and and you can't apply one set of rules to the other. In any code the bat has to be throw at the ball intentionally. Unintentionally it is nothing, agravating but nothing.

Thanks for the discussion. I do enjoy it!

In my opinion, the batter did not intentionally throw the bat at the ball. he just did it as he ran to first, thinking he could do that even though 1st base was occupied. The rules are the rules, so I accept that the call was correct.

What I'm not thrilled about is Lon's attitude that its the catcher's fault for not catching the ball. It was a nasty curve in the dirt, and most catchers are taught to block those balls, not to try to pick them. not really an err on the part of the catcher, if you ask me.

and why is it disingenous of me to say that this play hurt us?? the fact that the batter didn't know the rule and threw the bat so that it (unintentionally) hit the ball didn't hurt us? R1 would've been dead at 2nd if the bat didn't hit the ball. I'll stick with my opinion that this hurt us.

I don't think he meant anything bad. It is a phrase used by officials sometimes when there are several things happening at the same time. The old axiom is " P unish the one that messed up. By not catching the ball the catcher set the whole play in motion. Neither made a rule violation in this case so it isn't as applicable as in other cases.

MO, im not fussing about your catcher, Im just bringing up a point from an objective perspective. You are a coach..so you see this as a violation by the OPPOSING player that hurt YOU. I understand and sympathize with that. But if you want, it really STARTED with your Pitcher, because he threw the ball in the dirt to begin with!

but from an umpires view, there was no violation. its not a violation to run to first on a D3K even if you are out by rule, and you know that. If it had been YOUR batterrunner, and the PU had made up a rule and called him oout for running to First in this instance, you'd have a fit. Thats the disingenuous part.

The D3K really has no bearing on him tossing the bat, because players toss their bats all the time regardless of the circumstances--sometimes legally, sometimes not. it just happened this time that it struck the ball. Did that hurt your team? sure but its not a violation in this case-- the rules dont ensure perfect parity bw the teams all the time!


Im not looking to 'punish' who screwed up first here, I just bring it up because you are putting all the onus on the batter who accidentally tossed the bat onto the ball (and want him punished for that), and didnt acknowledge that a) the pitcher threw an errant pitch that b) the catcher couldnt handle.

jes trying to keep all in perspective

I would humbly suggest that the pitcher did his job effectively and the catcher did his job effectively. If I was the coach I would take that battery any day. As far as the rule goes, your call is all that's needed (and you do it well). Just leave it there...don't try to determine what the players correctly or incorrectly did from a skill perspectively just as coaches should not act like they know more than the umpire. Stay with what you know.

quote:

Stay with what you know.

A while back after a game my son made a comment about an umpire missing a call. I asked him if he was an umpire or a player. He looked at me real funny and said, "A player of course". I told him then play the game and leave the umpiring to the Umpires. He looked at me and smiled.

Ever since that day he will look at me and say, well I thought it was outside/inside/ball/strike, but I might have been mistaken.

I also explained to him that Umpires are held to a higher standard than anyone else. If you are in school and you take a test. Say the test has 100 questions and you get 10 wrong, you still got 90% correct and an "A". If an Umpire makes 100 calls and gets 10 wrong, he failed. It's all perspective.

I wouldn't do what umpires do for all the money in the world. I have the greatest respect for them for no matter what they do, noone is happy.

gunnersmom...i totally agree and i too have the highest respect for competent umpires as they have a difficult job and usually do it very very well..

quote:

Originally posted by Kimosabe:
I would humbly suggest that the pitcher did his job effectively and the catcher did his job effectively. If I was the coach I would take that battery any day...

Thanks Kimosabe! That was my point, even though Lon continues to point out that my pitcher threw an *errant* pitch and my catcher couldn't *handle* it. The pitch was supposed to be in the dirt, and my catcher was supposed to block it, not try to pick it. So my guys execute correctly and get *hurt* b/c the batter didn't know the rules.

I appreciate your knowledge of the rules, Lon, and I agree that the umps made the right call based on the rules. In the big picture, though, I'd rather have my two kids than the one who (at 16) doesn't know the rules regarding D3K.

MO,

I want all three of these players.
Every level I have played and coached at, we were taught/and have taught the batter to run on a dropped/missed 3rd strike.
I do not want my players to have to think, hmmm.... there's a guy on first, so...did the C miss the ball? how many outs are there?, what is the rule again? I want him running, now my guy at first needs to know the situation; but now the pressure is on the catcher to start thinking, hmmm....there's a guy on first, how many outs are there?, what is the rule again?

The baseball God (there is only one and we know He loves baseball) might have got you in this situation, but you know you have been on the receiving end of His grace many times before.

I coach 13/14 Pony so they are just learning the rule. I tell my catcher, usually my son, what the situation is before the AB so we get an ugly because they aren't sure. Even if it is a D3K I want him throwing to second if he can to get the lead runner. If it isn't a D3K I want him looking to throw to second but ignore first.

quote:

I agree that the umps made the right call based on the rules.

I learned my lesson. I will no longer editoralize about the manner of play, but stick to rules interpretations. That's my job, not coaching.

I'm certain, of course, that all coaches will in the spirit of fair play also refrain from commentary about umpire positioning, judgment calls, ejections, dealing with dugout chatter, etc, and stick only to rules interps

just kidding!

FED game I would have interference on the batter.

I would cite 7-3-5c: A BATTER SHALL NOT...Interfere with the catcher's fielding or throwing by: c. making any other movement which hinders actions at home plate or the catcher's attempt to on a runner.

PENALTY: When there are two out, the batter is out. When there are not two outs and the runner is advancing to home plate, if the runner is tagged out the ball remains alive and interference is ignored. Otherwise, the ball is dead and the runner is called out. When an attempt to put out a runner at any other base is unsuccessful, the batter is out and all runners must return to bases occupied at the time of the pitch. If the pitch is a third strike and in the umpire's judgment interference prevents a possible double play (additional outs), two may be ruled out (8-4-2g).

CASE PLAY 7.3.5 SITUATION F: Withe R1 on third, one out and two strikes on B3, B3 swings at and misses the pitch. The ball bounces of F2's glovef into the air, where it is hit by B3's follow-through. The ball rolls to the backstop. B3 reaches first base safety and R1 scores. RULING: The ball is dead immediately, B3 is out for interference and R1 returns to thire base. A batter is entitled to an uninterrupted opportunity to hit the ball, just as the catcher is entitled to an uniterrupted opportunity to field the ball. Once the batter swing, he is responsible for his follow-through.

This could also apply.

7-3-6:...If the bat breaks and is hit by the ball or hit a runner or a fielder, no interference shall be called. If a whole bat is thrown and interferes with a defensive player attempting a play, interference will be called.

PENALTY:The batter is out and runners return. If, in the umpire's judgment, interference prevented a possible double play, two players may be ruled out.

7.3.6 SITUATION: In hitting a slow roller to F5, the (a) whole bat slips out of his hands and interferes with F5 or (b) his bat breaks and hits the ball or F5 as F5 attempts to field the ball. RULING:In (a), the ball is dead immediately. B1 is declared out for interference, because B1 is responsible for controlling his bat and not allowing it to interfere with a defensive player attempting a play. In (b), there is no penalty and the ball remains alive.