Batter Interference

[MTR]

In most rule sets there is a statement which goes something like "The batters box is NOT a sanctuary" which means the batter must move out of the way of a play at the plate. An exaggerated example would be a runner trying to steal home and sliding through the Batters legs. Even if the batter didn't move that would clearly be interference.

That would be for a batter. This is not a batter, it is a batter-runner. The batter's box is irrelevant to this play. And again, where is the act of interference?

I'm still not getting your interpretation ... It's been said many times that INT shouldn't be called on a Batter, BR or Runner for merely doing what their supposed to be doing ... As in they just can't go poof and disappear ... In the OP this BR stayed in the batters box instead of running on a fair ball and was in the backstops way of making a play on R1 ... Is your interpretation that a BR has no responsibility to run on a fair batted ball ? Yes, the batters box has no bearing on this, but she was not advancing to first base.

Can you site a rule that requires any BR or R to run? Don't confuse this with what the BR/R needs to do to avoid being put out.

If there was a ground ball with runners on 1st & 2nd and as soon as F6 fielded the ball she jumped toward 2B thinking of turning a deuce. However, R1 just stopped dead trying to avoid an INT call, but in her eagerness, F6 forgot about R1 and turned into her and fell to the ground. Is that also interference because R1 didn’t run, but just stood there?

In the OP, the ball was down the 1B line. F2's range of vision from the outset to receiving the ball was where a BR would have run if she was going to run. If F2 didn’t see the BR going to 1B, just where did F2 think she was?

If the BR did head toward 1B and realized she was going to be out so she just stops a few steps up the line to force F3 to come make a tag. Instead, F3 tries to throw the ball to F2 and hits the still-as-a-statue BR, should that also be INT because the BR refused to run into the tag?

At no point is the offense required to facilitate the defense’s execution of an out. Nor should the offence be held accountable for the defense’s mistakes or misjudgments.

[playball13]

If I understand this correctly, I should teach by batters that on a suicide squeeze bunt ball and just stand there blocking the front half of the plate and allowing the runner to slide into the back half of the plate.

[GIMNEPIWO]

In most rule sets there is a statement which goes something like "The batters box is NOT a sanctuary" which means the batter must move out of the way of a play at the plate. An exaggerated example would be a runner trying to steal home and sliding through the Batters legs. Even if the batter didn't move that would clearly be interference.

That would be for a batter. This is not a batter, it is a batter-runner. The batter's box is irrelevant to this play. And again, where is the act of interference?

I'm still not getting your interpretation ... It's been said many times that INT shouldn't be called on a Batter, BR or Runner for merely doing what their supposed to be doing ... As in they just can't go poof and disappear ... In the OP this BR stayed in the batters box instead of running on a fair ball and was in the backstops way of making a play on R1 ... Is your interpretation that a BR has no responsibility to run on a fair batted ball ? Yes, the batters box has no bearing on this, but she was not advancing to first base.

Can you site a rule that requires any BR or R to run? Don't confuse this with what the BR/R needs to do to avoid being put out.

If there was a ground ball with runners on 1st & 2nd and as soon as F6 fielded the ball she jumped toward 2B thinking of turning a deuce. However, R1 just stopped dead trying to avoid an INT call, but in her eagerness, F6 forgot about R1 and turned into her and fell to the ground. Is that also interference because R1 didn’t run, but just stood there?

In the OP, the ball was down the 1B line. F2's range of vision from the outset to receiving the ball was where a BR would have run if she was going to run. If F2 didn’t see the BR going to 1B, just where did F2 think she was?

If the BR did head toward 1B and realized she was going to be out so she just stops a few steps up the line to force F3 to come make a tag. Instead, F3 tries to throw the ball to F2 and hits the still-as-a-statue BR, should that also be INT because the BR refused to run into the tag?

At no point is the offense required to facilitate the defense’s execution of an out. Nor should the offence be held accountable for the defense’s mistakes or misjudgments.

Okay, got it that time ... Thanks ... Suppose, same situation as the OP, but the BR still in the RH box steps backwards to avoid the tag ... As the play is being made on R1 by F2, the BR takes off for first and is not otherwise put out prior to reaching 1st base ... Whats the call ? Since being a RH batter she is not stepping backwards towards HP ... Or, is it that after a batter becomes a BR is she presumed to be stepping back towards home irregardless of her location since she is not technically advancing or standing still ?

[MTR]

Okay, got it that time ... Thanks ... Suppose, same situation as the OP, but the BR still in the RH box steps backwards to avoid the tag ... As the play is being made on R1 by F2, the BR takes off for first and is not otherwise put out prior to reaching 1st base ... Whats the call ? Since being a RH batter she is not stepping backwards towards HP ... Or, is it that after a batter becomes a BR is she presumed to be stepping back towards home irregardless of her location since she is not technically advancing or standing still ?

BR has no location which to retreat which is basis of the rule. The reference to "home plate" is for directional purposes (as opposed to toward 1st base).

The ruling would be INT, dead ball, BR out, all runners returned to last base touched at the time of the INT.

[GIMNEPIWO]

Okay, got it that time ... Thanks ... Suppose, same situation as the OP, but the BR still in the RH box steps backwards to avoid the tag ... As the play is being made on R1 by F2, the BR takes off for first and is not otherwise put out prior to reaching 1st base ... Whats the call ? Since being a RH batter she is not stepping backwards towards HP ... Or, is it that after a batter becomes a BR is she presumed to be stepping back towards home irregardless of her location since she is not technically advancing or standing still ?

BR has no location which to retreat which is basis of the rule. The reference to "home plate" is for directional purposes (as opposed to toward 1st base).

The ruling would be INT, dead ball, BR out, all runners returned to last base touched at the time of the INT.

Wouldn't R1 be out on BR trying to avoid a DP then ?

[MTR]

Okay, got it that time ... Thanks ... Suppose, same situation as the OP, but the BR still in the RH box steps backwards to avoid the tag ... As the play is being made on R1 by F2, the BR takes off for first and is not otherwise put out prior to reaching 1st base ... Whats the call ? Since being a RH batter she is not stepping backwards towards HP ... Or, is it that after a batter becomes a BR is she presumed to be stepping back towards home irregardless of her location since she is not technically advancing or standing still ?

BR has no location which to retreat which is basis of the rule. The reference to "home plate" is for directional purposes (as opposed to toward 1st base).

The ruling would be INT, dead ball, BR out, all runners returned to last base touched at the time of the INT.

Wouldn't R1 be out on BR trying to avoid a DP then ?

In accordance with what rule? That may be a notation under 8.2.F, but the rule providing the resolution above is 8.2.H

BTW, RS#33.I notes the step backward by the BR without mention of "home plate".

[GIMNEPIWO]

Okay, got it that time ... Thanks ... Suppose, same situation as the OP, but the BR still in the RH box steps backwards to avoid the tag ... As the play is being made on R1 by F2, the BR takes off for first and is not otherwise put out prior to reaching 1st base ... Whats the call ? Since being a RH batter she is not stepping backwards towards HP ... Or, is it that after a batter becomes a BR is she presumed to be stepping back towards home irregardless of her location since she is not technically advancing or standing still ?

BR has no location which to retreat which is basis of the rule. The reference to "home plate" is for directional purposes (as opposed to toward 1st base).

The ruling would be INT, dead ball, BR out, all runners returned to last base touched at the time of the INT.

Wouldn't R1 be out on BR trying to avoid a DP then ?

In accordance with what rule? That may be a notation under 8.2.F, but the rule providing the resolution above is 8.2.H

BTW, RS#33.I notes the step backward by the BR without mention of "home plate".

Got it, thanks ... I was in my Fed book which I was mis-reading and it wasn't as clearly stated as the ASA book ... Actually, the FED book penalty says " The runner is out " and perhaps should say " The batter runner is out " ...

[MTR]

Got it, thanks ... I was in my Fed book which I was mis-reading and it wasn't as clearly stated as the ASA book ... Actually, the FED book penalty says " The runner is out " and perhaps should say " The batter runner is out " ...

The step-back is covered under 8.2.8. Only for 8.2.7 is the note that the runner would also be out.

NFHS 8.2.7 (for which the added penalty would also be the runner) is when the BR interferes with the play at the plate in an attempt to prevent an obvious put out at the plate.

Two things here. It would still have to be an act to interfere and the obvious put out would have to be beyond doubt. IOW, unless the catcher can get over there and tag the runner out without urgency, I'm probably not going to judge that obvious. Of course, a defensive team is going to see every play at the plate as obvious because they have a great catcher and everyone knows she would be the put-out Just kidding