Well, I had never really payed attention to the cather interference rule, because it hardly ever seems to come up, but in last night's Orioles aat Royals game I learned something new about it.
I guess I already knew that it wasn't about intent. I didn't realize the wrinkle that if the catcher can make contact with his follow-through, no matter how wildly overexaggerated it is, then the call is made.
The new unique thing I learned is this: If the runner turns around and there's no play at second, he's not out.
Jay Payton took off for second base with Ramon Hernandez batting. John Buck throws through and makes contact with Hernandez...the interference is called. Payton stops; it looks like they've got him hung out to dry. He retreats quickly, though, and the throw back to first is too late.
I would've thought he was out anyway. It seems to me that the interference, if it really interfered with the throw, would've meant the second baseman would get the ball quicker and thus have a better shot to throw out Payton at first. I guess it's similar to the logic of no error on a botched double play; you can't assume the second throw.
Isn't someone out with regards to catchers interference? I mean isn't that why is it called that someone has to be out? Whether it be the runner in Jay Payton or the hitter in Ramon Hernandez or whoever is on base or hitting?
I thought so too, but apparently the way it works is that the call is made by them home plate umpire, and then on any play at second (or third if the runner starts at second) the runner is out. But, since there was no play he's safe at first. Hernandez wasn't out because it was only strike two. HE got a single on the next pitch, if I remember correctly.
I've seen it once in a Braves' game several years ago, here's the ruling:
Catcher's interference is called when the catcher physically hinders the batter's opportunity to legally swing at a pitched ball. This occurs most often when a catcher squats too close to home plate, so that the batter's bat touches the catcher's glove as the batter swings. This is most likely to happen on attempted steals where the catcher is anxious to catch the ball as soon as possible and may move his entire body or glove forward a bit.
In this case, play continues, and after continuous playing action ceases, the umpire will call time. The penalty here is that the batter is awarded first base, any runner attempting to steal is awarded that base, and all other runners advance only if forced. Additionally, the catcher is charged with an error. However, if the actual playing result is more advantageous than the penalty, the offense may elect to ignore the infraction (e.g., if the batter-runner reaches first safely and all other runners advance at least one base, catcher's interference is ignored by rule).
Batters Interference was also called at a pivital time in the Cubs-D-Backs game. The result call changed the situation from one out with a runner on second to 2 outs and nobody on late in a 1 run ball game. The Cubs were benefitted by the call against Byrnes (who not only hit Soto once, but twice on his back swing) and they went on to win.
With offensive interference, the play is dead (a dead-ball), whoever created the interference is out and all runners return to their base.
Catcher's interference is trickier, because the call isn't made until the play has been completed, because it's to the benefit of the offense and the offense can accept or decline the penalty if they benefit more without the free pass, in which case a runner on first could go to second but a runner on second or third would stay on second or third...etc.
It's exactly like pass interference on a touchdown pass, the offense declines it in favor of the touchdown. But, a false start is a dead ball and a penalty.
