Batters interference

[houghy49]

Just wondering if anyone can help me out on this one (for future reference).

I was playing in a game yesterday where the batter interfered with the catchers throw over to second base.

Both the batter and the runner were called out. Is this correct? Only ruling I can find states that the batter is out the ball is deemed dead, therefore runners return to the original base.

[wyatt33]

If the batter is in the box, it's not interference is it? The latter part of your post sounds spot on, but as its a judgement call, it stands to be scrutinized a little closer.

[farnt]

Might need some more details Houghy. Did they lean over, step out, fake bunt and leave bat over plate firmly?

[Deleted]

From Wikipedia:

The most common incidence of interference is when a member of the offensive team physically hinders the defensive team, decreasing their chances to make an out or increasing the chance that a baserunner will advance. Whenever this offensive interference occurs, the ball becomes dead.

If the interference was committed by a batter or a baserunner, that player is called out and all other runners must return to the bases they occupied at the time of the interference.

If interference is committed by a runner with the obvious intent of preventing a double play, the batter-runner will be called out in addition to the runner who committed the interference.

If interference is committed by the batter-runner before he reaches first base with the possible intent of preventing a double play, the runner closest to scoring is called out in addition to the batter-runner.

If interference is committed by a retired runner or by some other member of the offensive team, the runner who is most likely to have been put out will be called out.

[wrongway25]

I saw this recently where the batter was struck out and then stepped in front of the catcher to throw to 2nd (runner from 1st stealing).

Batter struck out and runner out on the obstruction.

[houghy49]

Wasn't the same game was it wrongway???

Batter swung for strike 3. This was a (summer) Div 3 player. The swing wasn't her best effort and caused her to end up off balance and in the catchers way.

After confronting the umpire and asking why the runner was called out (and the umpire admitting they weren't sure about the ruling), the two blues spoke and they decided the play stood.

I asked why she was given out again, to which the umpire stated 'we deemed that the runner would have been thrown out had the catcher been able to make the play'.

Again, without putting players down, the catcher also plays in the lower women's grades and struggles to make the distance to second (having injury issues hasn't helped her cause).

As far as I was aware the ball becomes dead and the runners return to their original base.

Hope this has made it a bit clearer.

[wrongway25]

No Houghy, the game I saw this at was up in Wangaratta at the U16 Winter Championships.

The batter in this case swung and walked straight in front of the catcher as he went to throw, it was a pretty clear case of obstruction, doubt it was intentional though just careless.

[camblue]

Openeye Wikipedia? ever heard of a book called "The Rules of baseball" even I read it once

[Deleted]

I've also read the 'Rules of Baseball' but I thought Wikipedia explanation was clearer and easier to understand. Is it wrong?

[smallchange]

if it was a third strike then the runner is out also out for the interference of the batter, which is included as: "any batter or runner who has just been put-out hinders or impedes any following play being made on a runner. Such runner shall be declared out for the interference of a team-mate" rule 7.09(e). The hindering/impeding does not need to be intentional in that case, nor does a judgment need to be made about whether the catcher would have made the throw. the exception is if the catcher does make the out, then there is no interference.