LSU Catcher's Interference Balk as South Carolina Runner Steals Home Leads to 15-Minute Rules Delay 

This play and call is a great example of why the umps should have mics to explain the call, like in football. Then the broadcasters and spectators would at least know why the play was called the way it was. They are just guessing.

I REALLY appreciate the fact that you speak clearly and not too fast, while explaining everything as thoroughly as possible. It's also funny because the broadcast team seems to rarely agree with the call until they actually look it up or get an explanation.

Now I fully understand what happened. The broadcast never brings up the issue that the Catcher was interfering with the batter, they only talked about possible interference with the runner.

This is such a good analysis -- I watched other videos that got caught up in the "is he on or in front of the plate" and "the batter should have tried to swing in order to get interference" (implying the you need to make contact with the catcher to get the call). This makes it so much clearer - thx!

I'm so glad you made this video. Other youtubers and comment sections have been an absolute mess about all parts of this one.

I had this happen when I was coaching HS varsity ball. The coach of the opposing team was Frank Chambliss, brother of ex-Yankee Chris Chambliss. He went absolutely bonkers and was ejected. On the flip side, I once had a pitcher step off when a runner from third took off too early on a steal attempt when I had switched from coaching to umpiring. I was behind the plate and clearly saw the pitcher step off from his windup position. As he is allowed to do, the catcher stepped in front of the plate to receive the THROW from the pitcher. The batter was totally surprised and actually swung the bat, hitting the catcher. I killed the play and called out the 3B runner for the batter's interference with the catcher. The coach went semi-nuts. In accordance with his request, I checked with my partner and he confirmed that the pitcher had stepped off. Upon informing the coach, he went full blown nuts and was ejected. I am not well versed in NCAA specific rules, but I am pretty well versed in OBR rules. In OBR it states that all runners must touch the bases, including awarded bases. Would this not also apply to this runner from third? The rules also say that all runners are assumed to have touched a base unless an appeal is made, upon which time the umpire has to make a call.

"After video review: On the pitch, the catcher comes out too early and prevents the batter from being able to swing. By rule this is both Catcher's Interference and a Balk, so the run scores." That at the very least would've been helpful for the fans and broadcast. Hope we see more elaborate explanations in baseball in the future, though there were no mics at all just a few years ago so 😂

I love the steal of third at the end. Such good baseball!

Not sure why this is so hard for some to comprehend. Especially with your great explanation

Excellent job! Referring to the definition of the rules, keeping it simple, and not over thinking the situation, is always the best practices in identifying rule infractions.

I agree with catchers interference and a balk in NCAA. However, please note that this NOT a BALK in NFHS. In NFHS, R3 is awarded home but not because of a BALK. Any runner attempting to steal when catcher obstruction occurs is awarded that base. NFHS 8.1.1e 1. makes no mention of a balk (unlike NCAA), and NFHS Casebook 8.1.1 Situation L makes it clear. For example, if there were runners on 2nd and 3rd only, and R3 attempts to steal home when catcher obstructs, but R2 was not stealing, R2 would stay at 2nd. If there was a BALK in NFHS, R2 would go to 3rd. Again, NO BALK in NFHS.

It's wild how ignorant a TON of college announcers are about the sport the cover. Great vid, as always!

Much better explanation than others I've seen. 👍

Lindsay your explanations are the best! They should hire you for rules consultation during broadcast games, like that former NFL official Dean Blandino, except better!

The worst thing is all he had to do is catch the ball- strike 3 inning over

It's looks like the batter is leaving the box before the pitch leaves the pitchers hand. Why doesn't this make a difference? If the batter is getting out of the way for the attempted steal, then he obviously wasn't going to hit the ball anyway.

Lindsey, Always enjoy the analysis and rule breakdown but I think you missed one here with regards to your comment at the 7:30 mark as it pertains to the college game. The rule reference I'm using is 8.6.b(4) . So if the pitcher had thrown to third in an attempt to catch the stealing runner who is obviously initiating the play the defense would still retain its right to appeal. You would be correct though if the pitcher had simply thrown to second in an attempt to pick the runner off, but as I said the runner in this case initiated the action (aka play). You can see the rules creators inserted this caveat with the intent to insure the offense can't simply initiate a play in an attempt to avoid a penalty for poor play, especially if it were to result in a run scored.

Good video and explanation. Odd that a pitcher at this level of play would not just disengage before making the throw. This is high level division 1 ball, and you learn as a young kid to step off to make the play when a runner breaks early.

You provide a wonderful service to the baseball community. I've learned so much from your videos. Thank you!

Awesome! I was told about this play by my brother so I had no idea the call. So I looked up the rule and took a while to finally found it.

I mean the batter still always has the free choice to swing, but the catcher might REALLY regret that.

I knew this when I saw the thumbnail. Catcher interferred with the batter when he moved forward to block the plate. What bothers me about the call is the batter bailed out of the batter's box because he saw the runner coming before the pitch was thrown. Why, if he did that is it still interference?

Again the only reason it was even confusing or controversial to some people was because the clueless broadcasters are citing the wrong rule which is entirely irrelevant to what actually took place. I can't even imagine how they thought it was within the rules for a catcher to put himself in a position where he's hovering over the plate while a pitch is being made.

Not surprised that the announcers are clueless. They ought look up rules before sharing their "knowledge" with viewers.

yet another time when the coaches nor the commentators know the rules

Question... Does the fact that the batter stepped out of the batters box before the pitcher released the ball come into play?

Happy subscriber here. Thank you for another excellent video!

Another reason for why the rule is written based upon the catcher's position (and it isn't like any other interference call) is that you don't want the batter to "legally" schwack the catcher with his bat in order to get the call. Think about it: if this rule didn't exist, wouldn't you take a free shot in a heated game... especially if doing so will get you run?

It’s sort of surprising to me that this is even controversial at all. It should be obvious to everyone that if a pitcher delivers a pitch from the rubber that the catcher can’t come out near or in front of home plate to receive the pitch. Like that should be completely obvious. I was sort of surprised it took the umpires so long to sort it out.

When I saw this first thing I thought of is you guys, LoL 😂😂😂 Go get them Lindsey

Batter jumps out of the way because he knows the call. If he knows the call, he should show a bunt instead. Catcher can't go through his bat.

Wouldn't it have also started with the catcher putting his right arm out, as if to shield the batter? Isn't that interference all by itself? If the bat is swung in that case, it would have likely hit the catcher's arm, somewhere between his fingers and shoulder. Great explanation, as always.

It was painful listening to the home team announcers in the LSU game, where they actively watched the replay and lied about what they were seeing.

The batter stepped out of the batters box, how can you say the catcher interferred with the batter ?

Wouldn't the batter backing out of the box prior to (maybe simultaneous to the beginning of) the catcher's movement be the batter making their free choice not to swing, negating the interference?

Question: is there anything the fielding team can do about the steal of third? Or any similar situation before an appeal? If a runner knows a team will appeal, could they just go for it and steal, since an attempt to catch them will make the appeal no longer possible?

What about how the batter steps out by choice? He chose not to make an attempt to hit the ball.

Thank you for your awesome explanation

Best breakdown I have seen of this situation.

I'm confused why this could not be a balk. F1 attempts a pitch, delivering legally from his plate. If the ball reached the plate, it is a pitch. If the ball doesn't reach the plate, would it not be a balk? Another example would be an attempted pitch that slips from the pitcher's hand. If it comes to rest before reaching the plate (or either foul line), that would be a balk with runners on base. If it reaches a foul line, it is a pitch and called a ball. In this video, if the umpire judged that the catcher received the ball in front of the plate, shouldn't he also call a balk? In the video, the play started with R3 and R1, so if a balk was called, the result would be the same. But if the play started with R3 and R2, the runner on 2nd would not advance, absent a balk call. And F2's interfering with the batter is a delayed dead ball. Does F2 interfering with the batter negate a balk? Does the catcher's interference supersede a balk? That is, does the balk rule not apply when there is catcher's interference with a batter?

It's all about taking away the hitters opportunity to swing. I think they had 3 ex players in the booth and no one mentions that. 😆

I think the "free choice" is an interpretation. The batter was leaving the box before the catcher moved (probably due to the knowledge that the runner was stealing home). Regardless, this was interesting. Great content!

Great explanation. Question: suppose the runner just feints to home but does not attempt to steal. The catcher caught the pitch in front of the plate, so it didn’t cross a foul line. Is this a balk?

I’m interested before these shenanigans. The batter cleared out of the box while the pitch was being thrown. Isn’t that a strike? On an 0-2 count which results in an out?

I feel like the other reason the interference rule awards the run for 3B is because, unless you call the runner back to the field after the interference call, they assumed they were out because of the tag. Forcing all players to touch home after being tagged "just in case" there was an interference/obstruction call may be on brand with a rule set that doesn't always agree with common sense, but instead they let common sense and the rules actually agree this time.

Does the batter vacating the box have any bearing on the ruling? Its hard to say the catcher interfered with him if he cant legally hit the ball

I can't understand why 13 minutes for 4 professional umpires to decide. The only possible discussion would be: did the pitcher pitched or threw. Then every umpire knows the call (catcher’s interference).

What happened to the batter must remain in the box (to exercise his free choice)?

Excellent break down.

The batter was stepping out of the box prior to the catcher stepping forward.

Trying to wrap my head around the nuance here, so please let me know if I'm understanding this correctly: The rule about catcher's interference on a squeeze or steal of home is there as an addition to the normal catcher's interference, making it both interference AND a balk. All the regular catcher's interference stuff still applies (which is unrelated to the runner coming home), but this just ADDS the balk on top of it, meaning that ALL runners advance, not just those attempting a steal or advanced by a force. Is that right?

wtf are you on the batter bailed on the batters box before the pitch was even released

To do this job at a high level requires so many twitch brain muscle skills and Master of Ceremonies qualities, and the knowledge required is just immense. Give your lower level umps a break Dad.

if the pitcher had steped off he would a been out no batters interference

Their argument might have been that the catcher didn’t interfere with the batter as the batter immediately bailed back out of the box. But that doesn’t matter by rule.

My days not complete until a video from Lindsey

Top job LinZee

The thing that gets me about catcher’s obstructing the hitter is that the hitter made his choice before the catcher got in his way. If you watch the side view you can clearly see the batter backing away before the catcher is anywhere near him. How can it be interference when the batter was backing out of the box already?

This is just a dumb play from the start. 2 outs, 2 strikes… and you steal home? Just throw the ball down the middle for strike three. As a catcher, don’t panic, you have all the time you need to tag the runner out. On a side note, as the batter, stick your bat out and hit the catcher, this way the umpire can’t miss the call.

For reference, how much of the catcher's foot has to be in front of the plate during the steal attempt for CI to be called? Would 3:02 be too much of his foot in front? The foot lands before he has possession of the ball, and if you slow it down, you can see when he picked his foot up to pivot left, going up on his toes, his toes are in front of the plate, meaning that they were in front of the plate before he had possession of the ball.

Wow! This makes it real hard on the catcher, who has to stay put until the ball crosses the plate (to give the batter his choice!) I thought that on interference plays, the defense has the right of way. How do the two rules jibe?

I've seen this been called once before. Mike Piazza got called for it when he stepped out of the crouch on a pitchout. It was the play the resulted in the infamous Bobby Valentine ejection where he returned to the dugout later in glasses and a fake mustache. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-lv-gE4ZhUfI.html&ab_channel=NewYorkMets

The issue is the batter leaves the batters box and cannot legally strike at the ball. So even if the batter could hit the ball he would be out for striking the ball out of the box. How do you interfere with batters that cannot legally strike at the ball. The batter is voluntarily leaving the box

Sooo , the batter choosing to completely step out of the box taking himself out of the opportunity to hit the pitch doesn’t affect the call ? If the batter is out of the box he can’t legally hit the ball so how does the catcher interfere with him ?

The only thing I don't understand is that the batter backed out of the batter's box before the catcher moved forward. The batter is not allowed to swing at the ball if either foot is out of the box. That should nullify the catcher's interference.

And thats a close call.... *Oh wait, more video at the end*.... Ok is it over? Its over... Ok cool. And thats a close call... Sports!

Not a balk in high school

So the batter stepping out of the box doesn't matter?

Ya can't be up there doin' a catcher's balk like that.

I saw the rule violation playing it the 1st time with no audio. It was that obvious

The batter was abandoning the batters box even before the ball left the pitchers hand, and the catcher was beyond the plate.

SEC officiating completely botched this whole ordeal and then silently told the world. What happens first pitch or play at home? So the first call made should be on the pitch. Under rule, NCAA 7-1A Batter, part b states “b. A batter shall not leave his position in the batter's box after the pitcher comes to the set position or starts the windup unless permission is granted by the umpire.” It goes on to state the penalty for leaving the box, “PENALTY for b -If the pitcher pitches, the umpire shall call "ball" or "strike," as the case may be. The batter leaves the batter's box at the risk of having a strike delivered, unless "Time" is requested and granted from the umpire. If the pitch is made, the ball is live.” So a ball, strike, or even catcher’s interference on the pitch should’ve been called. It would’ve obviously been a strike ending the inning. If they ruled catchers interference on the pitch, the ball would be dead, the batter would be awarded first, being the bases weren’t loaded to force the runner home with the batter taking first, the player stealing home would return to 3rd. How can you rule on a play at the plate that happens after a legal pitch, without first ruling on the pitch? SEC rules also call for a one game suspension to immediately follow a coach being ejected in the tournament. Why was Jay Johnson allowed to coach, despite what SEC rules clearly state. The broadcast even said due to SEC rules he’d be suspended for the championship game. My bad coach since your team won we’re gonna let you coach

I feel like the batter should have swung into the catcher's back, just to drive home the interference.

Rule 7-1A (b). PENALTY for b -“If the pitcher pitches, the umpire shall call “ball” or “strike,” as the case may be. The batter leaves the batter’s box at the risk of having a strike delivered, unless “Time” is requested and granted from the umpire. If the pitch is made, the ball is live.”

Are we not going to talk about how high school calls this obstruction? Sigh.... consistentcy

K.I.S.S. Keep It Simple, Silly.

Batter was not in the batter’s box! He backed out before the pitch!!

Geez, so much energy was spent here on “he intefered with the batter” when the batter was clearly giving himself up and getting out of the way of the runner before the catcher even got up out of his crouch.

In my opinion as an umpire for 35 year’s because the batter first retreated from batters box before Cather moved, the batter has no rights at home plate thus nullified the interference by Cather rule and out at plate should stand. You and umpires got call wrong

The batter bailed out long before the ball got there anyways. He had no intentions of staying in the box. Ball was still in pitchers hand when he was stepping out. Still a bad call

The batter wasn’t even trying to swing. He stepped out of the box.

So if the catcher can’t put himself in position to tag the runner out then a runner on third can score at any time. Furthermore the batter appeared to know that the runner was attempting to steal home because he backed away from the plate. If there was no batter there’s no interference. The batter was not in the box when the pitch was delivered.

All I can say, after wtchng so much Hcky recntly: if tht’s th corect call, It’s a Bad Rule!

If this was Bryce the big mouth Harper batting, ……. Wham

Ok…if I’m batting, ….. ‘’ oops I’m sorry catcher, but I was only swinging at the pitch, I didn’t mean to knock you head off’’

This narrator has the most annoying voice and sense