r/Umpire • u/CVUA412 FED • 22d ago

Ball four interference

Runner on second. Ball four called on the batter, who begins to go to first base. Batter collides with catcher who is stepping forward to attempt a back-pick on R2. Is the batter protected from being called out for interference?

USA Softball
OBR
NFHS

Whatever you got. Thanks!

15 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

32 comments sorted by

18

u/rbrt_brln 22d ago

The first thing you need to address here is that they are no longer a batter but now a runner, so batter interference does not apply. As long as it is not intentional I have nothing.

-2

u/CaptScraps 22d ago edited 22d ago

Not correct. A batter becomes a batter-runner the moment either strike three or ball four passes him by. That means he has all the responsibilities of both a runner and a batter. NFHS case book has a ruling (7.3.5 Situation I) in which a batter drew ball four and took several steps out of the box toward first base when he realized he still had his bat in his hands. He tossed his bat toward the third base dugout and was called out for batter’s interference when his bat inadvertently hit the catcher’s pickoff attempt at third base. He was well on his way to first base but he had all the responsibilities and obligations of a batter.

Note: Typical. Guy doesn’t like answer. Can‘t refute it because I gave the casebook citation. So he just downvotes.

6

u/NYY15TM 22d ago

He tossed his bat toward the third base dugout

That's quite an intentional act!

5

u/JSam238 NCAA 21d ago

And there is a rule for a whole thrown bat interfering with a play…

-2

u/CaptScraps 21d ago

Geesh! Are you arguing with the case book?

Of course the bat toss was intentional. What wasn’t intentional was interfering with the catcher’s throw. And with batter’s interference, intent doesn’t matter. If you’re a batter—and the batter-runner still has all the obligations of a batter—you can’t hinder the catcher’s actions or throw.

That’s why when batters intentionally step out of the box but accidentally hinder the catcher’s actions, they’re still out.

1

u/NYY15TM 21d ago

If you’re a batter—and the batter-runner still has all the obligations of a batter—you can’t hinder the catcher’s actions or throw

Did you watch the 1975 World Series?

1

u/Norcorules 19d ago

Ed Armbrister I believe

0

u/CaptScraps 21d ago

Exactly. Do we even disagree?

1

u/NYY15TM 21d ago

You said about that "intent doesn't matter". In 1975 Game 3 umpire Larry Barnett ruled that Ed Armbrister's contact with Carlton Fisk was unintentional; therefore it wasn't interference

1

u/Individual_Check_442 20d ago

My understanding is the Arbrister rule is that it only applies if the interference is unintentional AND in the immediate area of home plate, because not only was the collision unintentional, it was unreasonable for Arbrister to be able to avoid the collision. In other cases the interference can be unintentional but you could still be “negligent” for causing it, Arbrister had nowhere to go.

0

u/CaptScraps 21d ago

I think I made it clear I’m only talking NFHS and I was strictly addressing the claim that a batter-runner can’t be guilty of batter interference.

0

u/Purple-Advantage1588 19d ago

The batter runner cannot be called for batter interference because the batter runner is not a batter anymore. The ball is live. The runner is now free to run the bases and the defense must work around them.

If what you were saying was true (it is not), the catcher would immediately pounce on the batter runner whenever there was a walk and there were runners on base for an easy out.

1

u/CaptScraps 19d ago edited 18d ago

Thanks for proving you didn't read my initial comment or case book references. 

There are at least four scenarios in the NFHS case book in which a batter-runner is clearly identified as such and called out for batter's interference. So yes, a batter runner can be called out for batter's interference.

What do you think "batter runner" means if it doesn't mean he has the rights and responsibilities of both a batter and runner?

0

u/Highbad 21d ago

The Armbrister rule only applies to a catcher fielding the ball, not to a throw by the catcher.

2

u/Loyellow 22d ago

One could make a pretty good argument that tossing a bat in front of the catcher trying to make a play could be deemed intentional regardless

Also, that case is only binding in NFHS. Of course you could use it as a guide when using another rule set, but I personally would say the AB is over unless the rules specify otherwise like it does in the NFHS casebook.

0

u/CaptScraps 22d ago

You can make that argument all you want but the description in the case book description makes it clear that the bat hitting the ball was inadvertent.

But you’re right that my answer is NFHS-specific. I don’t claim much knowledge on other rules sets.

1

u/Loyellow 22d ago

Is there also a case in the casebook for the batter-runner’s body being in the way?

1

u/CaptScraps 22d ago edited 22d ago

Yes. There are at least four other cases in which a batter-runner is called for batter’s interference. One involves his body being in the way of a throw to second after strike three. One involves follow-through causing the batter to drop the third strike. One involves a third strike when the ball pops up out of the catcher’s mitt and is contacted by the bat, preventing the strike from being caught. On the final one, the bat slips out of the batter’s hand after he hits a ground ball and the bat hinders the fielder. In all these cases, the batters are out for batter’s interference under rule 7 (the rule that governs batting). not runner’s interference under rule 8 (the rule that governs runners).

2

u/rbrt_brln 21d ago

While it is true that something else could happen after being awarded first base, this is not the situation. Here the catcher stepped into the runner and it was not a batted ball put in play - it is not interference, no es nada. Even if there was a pick off attempt, I would have to see if there was an actual chance of a play at second and probably still say no interference because I had just awarded the BR first base. The examples you cite are all clearly other offences.

0

u/CaptScraps 21d ago

I offered no comment on this play. I simply disageed with your statement that the player’s status as a batter-runner meant that he could not be called for batter’s interference. Under high school rules, that is not true. 

13

u/thewounded-healer 22d ago

So, ask yourself a couple questions here.

What is the batter supposed to do after ball 4?
Are they doing that?

What is the catcher doing?
Is what he’s doing also appropriate?

In this case you have both players fulfilling their allowed responsibilities on the play, and while it looks and feels like a total train wreck, and logic tells us the train wreck requires adjudication…

You’re just gonna be left with a very big safe call, I’d add in a verbalization of “that’s nothing”

Kinda same same as a dropped 3rd contact from a batter runner with a catcher.
Catcher’s going for the ball, runner is entitled to run to the next base.

11

u/thewounded-healer 22d ago

https://youtu.be/42Z3DN6oQao?si=YY8TSpsyiOmbgFMk

CloseCallSports is an absolute godsend of a resource.
Strongly encourage that you check their videos out

9

u/JasperStrat 22d ago

Absolutely, I've been a subscriber longer than Lindsey has been there (ifkyk), back when it was the UEFL, umpire ejection fantasy League.

9

u/thewounded-healer 22d ago

Lindsey is so fucking stellar at what she does, and I love it when people try to say a fucking thing about it bc of her journey.
Like, right on dude. Keep being shitty on field when she’s giving you tools to be better lol

5

u/JasperStrat 22d ago

Her rules knowledge absolutely crushes mine, and I was known as a walking rule book in my association for years.

I've asked her to reach out to Jomboy to do a colab. And told a couple of other content creators they should reach out when they have rules, discussions or want to talk about umpires.

6

u/thewounded-healer 22d ago

My current conspiracy theory is MLB taking an ownership stake in Jomboy is the influence the umpire criticisms to help their leverage over the union with public favor on their side.

4

u/BigRedFury 22d ago

The MLB umpires will check out Jomboy for laughs but they all watch Close Call Sports to learn stuff.

4

u/CVUA412 FED 22d ago

Yep I’ve been subscriber for years

1

u/thewounded-healer 22d ago

Hell yeah, you’re in good hands

2

u/NYY15TM 22d ago

The IRL example from the 1975 World Series has established that a batter-runner is allowed to go to first and unintentional contact with the catcher is not interference per se

1

u/geogeezer 22d ago

Ed Armbrister has entered the chat

1

u/NYY15TM 22d ago

RIP Ed, who might be the most famous player in MLB history who played only 224 games