Umpires what’s the call?
- Thread starter 4dds
- Start date
Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch
Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.
We had the very similar situation at a 14U tournament a few weeks ago. Runner on third with 2 outs. The catcher tried to pick off the runner, but hit the batter in the helmet. The ruling was batter interference, and the runner at 3rd was out. The girl that got hit in the head and called for interference would lead off the next inning. This was the first time I've seen this happen, so not sure if this ruled correctly or not. Does it make a difference if the batter has both feet in the box?
If the batter stayed fully within the batter's box, it would only be batter interference if the ump judged that she intentionally hindered the catcher's pick off attempt. I assume that would mean she did something like jumping, waving arms around, etc. If she is just standing in the box doing nothing to intentionally hinder the throw and it hits her, no interference (and I believe the ball is still live).
The batter is the one out for the interference not runner closest to home. The only time the runner closest to home would be out was if the batter were already out.
Oooh, OK, so this made me think of two scenarios.
1) The pitch is way inside, such that the batter tries to avoid being hit. In doing so, she ends up out of the batter's box and in the catcher's way. No intent to interfere. Is this interference on the batter?
2) Similarly, the batter swings at a pitch and that causes her to be in the way, but she IS in the box. Again, no intent whatsoever to get in the way. (I've seen plays in MLB where a batter swings, falls across the plate on a throw to second, and interference is called, so that's not what I'm wondering about.)
Now your getting into areas that involve a lot of judgement and HTBT (had to be there) to see the play....
As a general concept, the batter's box is a sanctuary for the batter on throws from the catcher to another base, but the batter cannot do anything in the box that hinders the catcher from making the play. Generally, the thinking is that the batter should stay in the box, that catcher knows that, and can move to create a throwing lane around the batter.
For your Situation 1, all I can tell you is that it could be interference or it could not be depending on how the entire play unfolded...there is a lot of judgement involved in this one.
In Situation 2, on a swing and a miss, the batter is allowed a natural follow through on the swing without being subject to interference. Again, judgement on the "natural follow through" piece. Your example of the swing and miss, then stepping across the plate as a result of being off balance from the swing is almost always going to be called interference if the catcher is attempting to play on a runner.
As a general concept, the batter's box is a sanctuary for the batter on throws from the catcher to another base, but the batter cannot do anything in the box that hinders the catcher from making the play. Generally, the thinking is that the batter should stay in the box, that catcher knows that, and can move to create a throwing lane around the batter.
For your Situation 1, all I can tell you is that it could be interference or it could not be depending on how the entire play unfolded...there is a lot of judgement involved in this one.
In Situation 2, on a swing and a miss, the batter is allowed a natural follow through on the swing without being subject to interference. Again, judgement on the "natural follow through" piece. Your example of the swing and miss, then stepping across the plate as a result of being off balance from the swing is almost always going to be called interference if the catcher is attempting to play on a runner.
The primary factor is not the batter's location, but the batter's actions. If the batter's movements are not natural to taking a pitch or finishing a swing she is liable to be called for interference. Being in the box is irrelevant if the batter moves into the catcher's way but stays in the box.
- Dec 16, 2019
- 7
- 3
The hitter doesn't have to move. If she didnt purposely try to obstruct the catcher she shouldn't have been called for interference
- Dec 16, 2019
- 7
- 3
Im with u..The hitter would need to have a "running" start to take and still step out before the catcher releases the throw.
This isn't true. Intent doesn't really play a role. It's just a matter of whether or not the batter actively hindered the catcher by doing something not normally related to taking a pitch, swinging, or bunting. In other words, anything that isn't part of their normal actions. In fact, you often get the call on batters who are actually trying to get out of the way.
