Im still trying to get what "Actively Hindering" means.
So if a hitter just stands there in the box, she could still be viewed as hindering.

In most cases a ball goes by the hitter and she will then turn to face her coach in the third base box. This happens every inning of a game. Then in the 6th inning a defensive team runs a pick play at third. The hitter does exactly what all of the hitters have been doing the entire game, only this time she gets whacked on the back of the helmet as the catcher is trying to make this throw.

Would you call interference?

I love this wording. Kind of like the Supreme Court justice back in the 70s that said he couldnt give a definition of pornography, but he could tell you what it was when he saw it:)

One step further. Batter has 3 balls on her, next pitch is not close and is ball 4. She starts to trot to 1st base, and again the defensive team is running a pick play and she collides with the catcher, or gets whacked on the helmet by the attempted throw. She could/should be called out for interference, and I think that just stinks. The hitter is doing nothing that every other hitter would do in the same situation, and yet she is likely "Interfering."

Been a few years since I've Coached Dixie Rec ... But wagging the bat is a strike on the batter ... not sure about LL or what rule set you are talking about ...

I am not an umpire....but my understanding of the rule as it applies to your scenarios...

Situation #1....turning to face coach for signs...
First off, while it sounds possible, my gut says there isn't enough time for her to have begun turning to face coach after the ball has passed her and before the catcher attempts a throw. However, assuming there is enough time....or that there is a delay in which the catcher decides to throw only after noticing how far off of the base the runner is, than yes. If in the umpires judgement, the batters action of turning within the box to face her coach caused her to interfere with the catcher, she will be called for interference.

Situation #2
I also believe that she could be called for interference, if leaving the box to head to first on ball four. I would assume (uh,oh....that's when trouble starts) that an umpire takes into account that the batter is only doing what she is supposed to, and applies that to his judgement. i.e. If the batter turns to toss bat towards third base dugout before heading towards first and interferes with catcher, might receive a different ruling then had it occured as she was immediately heading towards first.

Its been explained a few different ways now. Is it really that difficult? If it is, then the next time an umpire calls it - no rants from you - You consider that this rule is not one where you have a grasp of it and just stay in your box.




hmm.. probably not; however, the vagueness of your scenario suggests you are trying to find that perfect dark gray line with which to measure it.

If the umpire determines that the batter actively did something to interfere with the catchers opportunity to make an out,that is interference.



Well.. kind of, except the difference is we have given you the definition using plain English. If the batter does something to actively hinder the catcher, she is out.


That pretty much sounds like its probably INT.

I personnally dont feel more scenarios or explaining it differently would be beneficial at this point and I'm out of ideas to assist you.

Maybe bretman will login and write a book length post explaining it better than I do.

Only by someone who doesn't have a clue. Other than when a player or coach is directed by rule to vacate an area, inaction cannot be considered an act of interference.



Okay, the batter moving is an "act" and if in the judgment of the umpire it interfered with the catcher, it is interference.



Well, you might want to find another activity since you think it all stinks. If that was your catcher, I don't think it would be beyond the realm of belief that you may in the umpire's face demanding INT be called.

Whether you like it or not, there are two teams on the field and both have to take some level of responsibility for being aware of the game situations.

if you ask a dozen umpires what "actively" means, and they might give you a dozen varying answers, but I doubt you will get exactly the same answer, and that is to the umpires benefit and protection, as the "active" part gives the umpire carte blance to rule whichever way the umpire sees fit and justified as such. its worded purely for umpire wiggle room.

You can order rule books from this link:

http://www.nfhs.org/content.aspx?id=3281&linkidentifier=id&itemid=3281

Elsewhere on that site I think there is also a downloadable summary of the key rules differences between ASA and Fed

As a coach and a father of a catcher, I don't find "actively" to be vague at all. Active means moving, fairly straightforward to coach batters that with runners on base they have a responsibility after a pitch to remain stationary until the ball is thrown from the catcher to another fielder (even if they think that fielder will be the pitcher). After your catcher gets hit by a practice swing a few times by you learn to appreciate that someone went to the trouble to encourage awareness. Same with umpires, I saw the same player hit an umpire moving to a position to see a play twice in the same game. Guy had the patience of a saint and was lucky enough to catch it on the chest protector both times.

Taking that reflexive step towards third base coach is usually followed by taking those relfexive practice swings not sure I would trust a kid to do one and not the other. Batters need to be game aware, I find it dissapointing when they clearly aren't and it's 100% a coaching decision to train them to be aware.

Speaking of "actively hindering"...just curious as to whether anyone has had the on-deck batter that runs out of the circle to pick up the bat in the middle of a live ball situation called for interference...

I haven't had it happen yet where the on-deck batter put herself in the middle of play at the plate but it's been close a few times...

I have not seen it ... but I just started coaching a HS team and this was a topic of discussion on Saturday ... Last years coach told them that the on deck batter should be retrieving the bat ... I changed that quickly ...