How do you score this?

Great question! Here's my take on it.

1. From what you've described, I think the ump may have been incorrect in calling interference, because rule 6.06 states: "A batter is out for illegal action when ... (c) He interferes with the catcher's fielding or throwing by stepping out of the batter's box or making any other movement that hinders the catcher's play at home base." But like you said, it was a judgement call.

2. But -- given that he DID call interference, I don't think you can give the batter a walk AND the interference call. It's got to be one or the other. Doing it your way, when you "prove" the box score, it would be out of balance. So unfortunately, I think he gets an 0 for 1. Touhg break! The other situation you described would be scored similarly.

Interestingly enough, if the throw actually had gotten the runner out at 3rd, the interference would have been taken away, and the batter would have then been awarded first base because of the walk.

That's what makes this game so dang interesting!

UTBaseball,

I think you got it right. The batter did walk, and became a runner. As a runner, his actions need to be intentional to be judged interference, but apparently the umpire did consider it intentional. At the time of the interference, the batter-runner is out. Since he has not reached first at the time of the interference, and no runner was forced, the base runner is returned to his time of pitch base.

Score a walk against the pitcher, and a walk for the batter, and an out for inteference on the batter runner. RPD: rule 6.06 doesn't come into play, because the interference wasn't by a batter. The applicable rule is 7.08 (b). I believe the ruling is the same in all codes.

If it weren't ball 4 (and not strike 3, dropped), in this instance the result is almost the same: the batter is out, and R2 is returned to second base.

3FG,

I hear you -- but I'm not completely convinced.

Let's take a close look at the rule you say applies -- 7.08(b)

"Any runner is out when . (b) He intentionally interferes with a thrown ball..."
[Couldn't be that part, since he didn't intentionally interfere with it]

"or hinders a fielder attempting to make a play on a batted ball;
[Couldn't be that part, since it wasn't a batted ball]

"A runner who is adjudged to have hindered a fielder who is attempting to make a play on a batted ball is out whether it was intentional or not
[Couldn't be that part, since again it wasn't a batted ball]

And then the rule goes on and on but doesn't really apply here.

Is he a runner if he hasn't left the batter's box? Actually he is, because 6.08 states, "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 (a) Four "balls" have been called by the umpire;"

That part tends to support your interpretation.

But I don't find anything in any of the rules that directly applies to this situation.

Further comments?

quote:

Originally posted by RPD:
"Any runner is out when . (b) He intentionally interferes with a thrown ball..."
[Couldn't be that part, since he didn't intentionally interfere with it]

But it is that part.

Look, we're just keeping score here. The umpire gets to decide what is or isn't intentional. As I said in my first post, apparently the PU judged the batter's action to be intentional. There is no other way for the batter runner to interfere in this situation.

Could the umpire be right? Sure. The umpire can reasonably believe that the batter knew that R2 was running --the defensive dugout is yelling "runner!", and R2's path is in the batter/runner's field of vision. Whether he is in the batter's box isn't relevant. So the umpire has to decide if reeling backwards and the toss of the bat toward the dugout is innocent, or an attempt to slow down a throw. Conversely he has to decide if the catcher is trying to buy an interference call.

The umpire seems to have decided it was intentional. Even if he actually kicked the rule and the call, as a scorekeeper you still have to record what he called.

I think you've nailed it. Good call!

3FG & RPD thanks for your replies. I thought I had this one right but just wanted to make sure. I've been scoring games for many years and have never come across this particular situation.

3FG,

On the second question, you said... "If it weren't ball 4 (and not strike 3, dropped), in this instance the result is almost the same: the batter is out, and R2 is returned to second base."

Now, I agree but my real question in this situation is how do you score the "interference out" in regard to the batter's batting average. Is he called out so it is just like a called 3rd strike or is he just out and it is more like a walk and doesn't have any affect on the batters average?

Thanks,
UTB

Okay, does anyone want to take a stab at the second "hypothetical" scenario?

I think we have decided the first scenario is scored a walk for the batter and then the batter/runner is called out for interference.

The second scenario is a bit trickier because if the pitch where the interference occurs had not been "ball 4", then there is no walk and the batter doesn't become a runner but is still the batter. How is this scored? I bet someone can come up with the answer here.

Thanks,
Charles

If it's not ball four or a dropped strike three, then 6.06(c) states that the batter would be called out for offensive interference. So he would get an 0 for 1 in this situation, and according to 10.10(3), the putout gets credited to the catcher.

If your question is about how to denote that in the scorebook, I"m not sure there's a uniformly accepted abbreviation for that.

RPD,

Thanks for the response. No, I was looking for exactly what you gave me; that it would or would not affect the batters average. I figured that it would be 0 for 1, I just didn't have the rule to back it up so wasn't sure about it. I would probably just make something up for the abreviation like BI (Batter Interference).

Thanks again for your help.