What is the correct call?

[mad hornet]

Runner on 3rd one out. Batter swings at strike two but ball squirts away from the catcher.

The batter mistakenly thinks she swung out on strike three as do some of her teammates. She starts to take a couple of steps toward the dugout (her dugout is on the 3B side) when her teammates holler for her to run to first.

At the same time she turns to go to first, the runner on third is attempting to score. As the catcher reaches home with the ball the batter collides with her while running to first preventing the tag as the runner from third slides into home.

There is a long conference between the FU and the PU after which they announce that the batter is out for interfering with the play but the run scores.

I don't think they got it right. This was a USSSA game by the way, 10u travel.

 

[Comp]

Batter is out for interference, runner reutrns to third.

 

[honus14]

I'm no U-Trip expert, but this is from their rules PDF posted at www.usssa.com:

Sec. 10. A batter shall not interfere with the catcher’s fielding or throwing by leaning over home plate. By stepping out of the batter’s box, by making any other movement which hinders action at home or the catcher’s attempt to play on a runner, or by failing to make a reasonable effort to vacate congested area when there is a throw to home and there is time for the batter to move away.

PENALTY: When there are two outs, the batter is out. When there are not two outs and a runner is advancing to home, the runner is out and the ball is dead unless the runner is tagged out, in which case the ball remains alive and interference is ignored.

Since there was one out, I would have the runner out, dead ball, same batter still up. I believe ASA would have the batter out and the runner returning. I have no idea how the heck anybody would have the run scoring here!

 

[mad hornet]

I'm no U-Trip expert, but this is from their rules PDF posted at www.usssa.com:



Since there was one out, I would have the runner out, dead ball, same batter still up. I believe ASA would have the batter out and the runner returning. I have no idea how the heck anybody would have the run scoring here!

I agree and was troubled by the call. Fortunately this was just a game I was watching and didn't involve either of my kids's teams.

 

[BretMan]

USSSA seems to be the last of the "major" sanctioning bodies that still have this ruling, calling out either the batter or the runner depending on how many outs there are. ASA, NFHS and NSA all call the batter out and return the runner, no matter how many outs there are.

There are a lot of other sanctioning bodies out there, so there might be others that call it this way. Most seem not to and some that used to don't anymore. Calling the runner out with less than two outs is a direct take from baseball where most rule sets still follow that ruling.

 

[MTR]

USSSA seems to be the last of the "major" sanctioning bodies that still have this ruling, calling out either the batter or the runner depending on how many outs there are. ASA, NFHS and NSA all call the batter out and return the runner, no matter how many outs there are.

There are a lot of other sanctioning bodies out there, so there might be others that call it this way. Most seem not to and some that used to don't anymore. Calling the runner out with less than two outs is a direct take from baseball where most rule sets still follow that ruling.

And I think one of the questions is why would you call the runner out for the batter's actions?

 

[honus14]

And I think one of the questions is why would you call the runner out for the batter's actions?

I would guess that the idea is to punish the offense more severely by removing the runner from scoring position. With two outs, that's no longer a penalty, so the batter is called out so s/he can't bat again the next inning.

 

[MTR]

I would guess that the idea is to punish the offense more severely by removing the runner from scoring position. With two outs, that's no longer a penalty, so the batter is called out so s/he can't bat again the next inning.

I don't disagree with what you are saying, just don't agree with the lack of consistency.

 

[playball13]

The only cases I can think of where this might make sense is on plays at the plate with less than 2 out where the batter can directly effect the play for the benefit of the offensive team. On a missed squeeze or a WP or PB that bounces right back to C the batter can 'intentionally' block/interfere with the C to prevent the runner being put out at home. The batter takes the out and the runner returns to 3B with another chance to score. With 2 outs, I guess you don't want to reward the batter for their interference and allow them to bat the next inning.
Do you think they thought this hard when righting the rule?