Follow
Donate to HeyBucket.com - Amount:

Welcome Anonymous !

Your Fastpitch Softball Bible
 

The Umpire Corner

Batter's Interference

Rule question? Get it answered here.

by daddyxs4 » Fri Mar 07, 2014 1:46 pm

Here's the situation- Batter up in the box (ump had a low zone both teams adjusted). Fastball in Batter swings/misses. Catcher pops up throws behind the batter. As the batter steps back ball nicks off the back of the helmet.

Interference or not?

I argued for it but didn't get it, we were on defense so I may be a little biased.
daddyxs4
Premium Member
Premium Member
 
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 9:39 am

by jonriv » Fri Mar 07, 2014 3:17 pm

Batter still in box?
User avatar
jonriv
 
Posts: 4875
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:01 am
Location: Connecticut

by UmpSteve » Fri Mar 07, 2014 4:22 pm

jonriv wrote:Batter still in box?


The answer to that question is the red herring that probably resulted in the incorrect ruling.

The batter is entitled to :
1) Any reasonable action involved in attempting to hit the ball,
2) Any reasonable action to avoid being hit by the pitch,
3) Stand her ground in the batter's box.

The batter is NOT entitled to:
1) Any protection against interference while out of the batter's box, whether intentional or accidental, OR
2) Any action or movement within the batter's box which actually interferes with an attempted play that doesn't meet the criteria listed above.

Bottom line, in this case it doesn't/shouldn't if she was still in the box. She "actively" (key word in ASA) made a "movement" (key word in NFHS/PGF) that interfered with the catcher's attempt to play on a runner. Under NCAA rules, the action must be considered intentional; as a matter of standard practice, any movement not involved in attempting to hit the ball is to be considered intentional. Unless the runner being "played" on was standing on the base when the ball was thrown, interference is the accurate ruling.
User avatar
UmpSteve
Premium Member
Premium Member
 
Posts: 461
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:38 am

by jonriv » Sat Mar 08, 2014 5:05 am

The reason I mentioned the batters box is that in my experience more batters are called for interference backing out of the box( to get out of the way) than those who stay in the box in a more neutral pose. My experience also is that those calls usually produce screams of "but she was getting out of the way!" Not realizing it did not matter
User avatar
jonriv
 
Posts: 4875
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:01 am
Location: Connecticut

by PDad » Sat Mar 08, 2014 2:16 pm

BS JR - OP said the batter stepped back into the catcher's line, so they obviously weren't in a neutral pose. It doesn't matter whether the batter was still in the box or what you've experienced.

Questions posed in HB's Umpire Corner are best left to the qualified umpires to handle.
User avatar
PDad
Premium Member
Premium Member
 
Posts: 3439
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:52 pm

by jonriv » Sat Mar 08, 2014 6:20 pm

Fu pd just giving some scenarios. Get your panties out of a wad
User avatar
jonriv
 
Posts: 4875
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:01 am
Location: Connecticut

by Anti-Clone » Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:42 am

Please provide additional information so that we can discuss more precisely what the ruling could be. For instance, describe what you mean by "the batter stepped back." Was she always within the batter's box? Was this her natural motion after a swing and miss? When she did step back, was she within the batter's box or did she step out? Were there runners on base? If so, where? Was there an actual play being made on one of the runners?

Without knowing this information, no one can intelligently respond to the scenario.

Thanks!
Anti-Clone
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:04 pm

by PDad » Sun Mar 09, 2014 8:38 pm

jonriv wrote:Fu pd just giving some scenarios. Get your panties out of a wad

:roll: :lol: :lol: :lol:
User avatar
PDad
Premium Member
Premium Member
 
Posts: 3439
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:52 pm

by daddyxs4 » Sat Sep 03, 2016 10:11 am

Sorry got busy for a couple of years!

Batter was stepping back out of box. The argument hinged on the batter moving out of the box and the ump ruled the batter was still in the box. Asked if she was moving out he said yes, but at the time of the incident she was still in the box. I'm still under the impression it is batter's interference, but I'm usually wrong, been married a long time.
daddyxs4
Premium Member
Premium Member
 
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 9:39 am

by PDad » Sat Sep 03, 2016 4:02 pm

daddyxs4 wrote:... I'm usually wrong, been married a long time.

:lol:
User avatar
PDad
Premium Member
Premium Member
 
Posts: 3439
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:52 pm

Next

Return to The Umpire Corner