Two Questions

Batter interference.  Anything that makes you interfere other than natural swing and follow through so leaning over plate or moving in box.

Second.

Agree w/ PitchingFan on both.  If you were the defensive coach - would you want the call? Read up on 7-3-5 for the first and 8-3-3(d) for the second. If you have a casebook 7.3.5 situation E.

No such thing as the catcher should create the throwing lane.  Think runners lane interference to first... Steal of second and batter loses balance and crosses plate. The throw to 3rd is tough because you are right the batter cannot disappear, but you have to judge movement and cannot assume intent. It ends up being control - he knew the H&R was on and he's doing anything to hit that ball (like a suicide squeeze).

The casebook does say a batter "is entitled to his position in the batter's box and is not subject to being penalized for interference unless he moves or re-establishes his position after F2 has received the pitch, which then prevents F2 from attempting to play on a runner.  Failing to move so F2 can make a throw is not batter interference."

Thank you gentlemen and not trying to be argumentative but I think if you saw the play you would understand my questioning of it. Full honesty my team benefitted from both calls. In the second one I thought he got it wrong but wanted to make sure on here.

As for the interference I wouldn't have been surprised if he called it but I would have argued. John F you asked if I was the defensive coach would I want that call - absolutely but I also would have been more upset at my catcher. It was not good on his part and I know that bad play doesn't excuse not following the rules but it was bad on the catcher part. By the time he made the throw I would have argued the play was over because my runner going to third he was throwing at was there safe. I'm not 100% sure he was on the bag at the time of the throw but when I looked at him after seeing the ball fly into LF he was already getting up from his slide.

Also more clarification my batter swung at the pitch, lost balance and stepped toward 3B dugout as a RHH but by the time of the throw had regained balance, pretty certain he was still in the box and leaning down a little trying to get out of the way but catcher still hit him with throw.

Once again I wouldn't be surprised if it was called but when does the opportunity for interference end and bad decision on catcher begin? I think its a great argument it was a bad decision but I benefitted from the call. If you guys saw it I think you would understand better where I'm coming from even if it wouldn't change your mind.

But it benefitted me so my memory may be a little jaded.

Question 1 - may be a situation where you have to see it... but the fact that the batter stepped back toward 3b dugout - makes me lean toward interference.  There is no provision for intent.

Question 2 - If the ball goes out of play from a pitch.  1 base.  The rule is from the rubber - not the mound.  If a P goes to pick off a runner at 1b as he hop steps and throws, he has not disengeged the rubber and if the ball sails into the stands 1 base.   Same play but P steps back off the rubber and ball sails into the stands 2 bases.  Since he disengaged the rubber he is now a fielder - no different than a SS or 2B.

Rule of thumb - 2 bases awarded from any fielder when ball thrown out of bounds.  The award is determined at the last base legally obtained by the runner at the time of the throw, not the time it went out of play.  A pitcher on the rubber is not considered a fielder (for this rule).

The timing of this post. LOL. Son got called out for interference Friday night. He put the bat out to bunt. Ball was in the dirt so pulled the bat back. Then never moved. Catcher was trying to throw out runner stealing 3rd. Ran right into son still standing in the box knocking him back. Catcher tried to go straight down the 3rd base line though son to make the throw. Don't know what the umpires explanation was when coach questioned the call.

https://baseballrulesacademy.c...with-catchers-throw/

There can be times when there is interference but not illegal interference. (e.g. a pitch in the dirt requires the catcher to field the ball behind the batter thus causing the throwing lane to be blocked by the batter.)

@NewUmpire posted:

Question 1 - may be a situation where you have to see it... but the fact that the batter stepped back toward 3b dugout - makes me lean toward interference.  There is no provision for intent.

Question 2 - If the ball goes out of play from a pitch.  1 base.  The rule is from the rubber - not the mound.  If a P goes to pick off a runner at 1b as he hop steps and throws, he has not disengeged the rubber and if the ball sails into the stands 1 base.   Same play but P steps back off the rubber and ball sails into the stands 2 bases.  Since he disengaged the rubber he is now a fielder - no different than a SS or 2B.

Rule of thumb - 2 bases awarded from any fielder when ball thrown out of bounds.  The award is determined at the last base legally obtained by the runner at the time of the throw, not the time it went out of play.  A pitcher on the rubber is not considered a fielder (for this rule).

My guy stepping back is what made me think it was going to get called but the timing of the play and just not good baseball by the catcher got me thinking when does it go from textbook rules to judgement that we play on.  Honestly if I was the defensive coach I would have wanted it called but I would understand it not being called based on how it went down.  It's funny because the catcher had a very good game.  He hosed two of my guys already trying to steal 2B.  It was just this play wasn't good.

The semantics of rubber and mound make sense and understand.  Poor wording on my part.

TXballDad - us getting this call might be karma paying us back.  Twice this year I've had batters swing through a H/R but not falling over the plate get called for interference.  I could never get a good explanation as to what my guy did either time.  Both times catchers made good throws but we were safe except they go back and my batter was out LOL. 

@coach2709 posted:

My guy stepping back is what made me think it was going to get called but the timing of the play and just not good baseball by the catcher got me thinking when does it go from textbook rules to judgement that we play on.  Honestly if I was the defensive coach I would have wanted it called but I would understand it not being called based on how it went down.  It's funny because the catcher had a very good game.  He hosed two of my guys already trying to steal 2B.  It was just this play wasn't good.

The semantics of rubber and mound make sense and understand.  Poor wording on my part.

TXballDad - us getting this call might be karma paying us back.  Twice this year I've had batters swing through a H/R but not falling over the plate get called for interference.  I could never get a good explanation as to what my guy did either time.  Both times catchers made good throws but we were safe except they go back and my batter was out LOL.

Baseball is mostly judgement calls.  Ball/Strike - Safe/Out - Balk/Not - even two experienced umps can see the same play differently.  The inconsistencies are more evident when you have umps from different organizations that dont have the same training - or when some don't keep up and share scenarios they encounter so others can at least learn from their experience.  Especially on the rare play like interference and obstruction.  Add to that the fact that there are only 2 on most fields and the pairings seldom are the same.  I know a game goes a lot smoother when I work with someone that I have done games with in the past.  Part of the beauty of the game is its imperfections.

I agree with everything you said NewUmpire until the last statement.  That is the problem with baseball is no two umpires enforce the rules the same.   Every umpire has his own strike zone, what is a balk, and such.  It will never happen, and I was an umpire in college and minor league for years, but we must get to a more concise version of what is what in calls.

College baseball has become a joke when you watch reviews and it is clear to everyone on both sides and they still uphold the original call.  I've never understood why the umpire who made the call is involved in the conversation on the review.  What he saw or thought should have no influence over the review.  They should watch it and make a call with no interpretation from the umpires on the field.  But as an SEC higher up told me recently.  If we overrode every one that came through in review that should be no one would trust the umpires.  My response to my friend was no one trust them now.  There was a crew chief recently that when they looked at hit trax he missed 58% of his ball strike calls and yet called the next weekend as a crew chief again.