strike or a ball??

[terry larkin]

strike or a ball??

as a 50 year player, coach, or umpire I've never seen this issue. Umping an over 35 league, USSSA rules. the incoming pitch will be a strike, when suddenly the catcher reaches to catch the pitch a little above the hitters waist line. Then, the Catcher brought his glove containing the ball down onto the plate.

I called strike. Offense went off on me. I said "hey, Ive never seen a catcher do this. It is not "traditional" catcher interfernece and the pitch was a perfect strike....until the catcher reached up to make a "premature" catch of the ball.
thoughts.

 

[tonys1]

Did the pitcher take a walking start to the mound though?

 

[MaverickAH]

What's one of the requirements before a pitch can be considered a strike?
I has to clear the plate. (unless it's mat ball)

It does not sound like the catcher allowed the pitch to do that. I would've called a ball & the catcher would've received a stern warning from me to not repeat that action. More than anything else, it's dangerous!

 

[EAJuggalo]

What's one of the requirements before a pitch can be considered a strike?
I has to clear the plate. (unless it's mat ball)

It does not sound like the catcher allowed the pitch to do that. I would've called a ball & the catcher would've received a stern warning from me to not repeat that action. More than anything else, it's dangerous!

Where is this in the rule book? The only thing I can find says that it is a ball if the ball touches the ground before passing completely across home plate, or if the ball touches the plate. I can't find anything about the catcher catching the ball.

I would have a strike unless there is catcher's obstruction, or I was certain the ball was going to hit the plate.

 

[Redsfan]

Anything close should be a strike. It's a hitters game. If that catcher was dumb enough to put his glove that close let him get his hand broken when he tries to catch another one like that and the batter actually swings.

 

[TWmccoy]

I'd warn the catcher too. Any further interference of that nature would be an ejection. Some idiot catchers get overzealous and start reaching forward to catch the ball before it even has a chance to land. Last year I actually hit a catcher's glove while swinging when he did that.

Oh, and I'd call the pitch a ball just to make it clear to the catcher what's going on.

 

[Crusty]

Nothing against the rules in slowpitch or baseball. There are catchers that do it in baseball. There reach forward and catch the ball as close to the plate or even over the plate to effectively get a strike call. Meaning a pitch that is inside...if he catches close to his body the pitch will look like it is further off the plate than it was Vs reaching forward and catching it just behind or over the plate it may only be an inch or two off the plate and get the call. Just because of the angle the ball is coming in or moving. It also hinders the batter because they may adjust their swing if they see it out of the corner of their eye. It is being competitive at the highest level nothing more. It is not interference unless the batter swung and makes contact with the catcher or his glove. Molina has actually been called out for this a number of times and in one circumstance the opposing manager got ejected for it when the umpire told him there was nothing he could do about it and argued the point. Another time Molina got ejected for fighting with the other team lol when the accused him of cheating and had choice words for him lol.

 

[EAJuggalo]

I kicked the question up the line and got a response from a Conference USSSA UIC. His response was that it should be called a Ball. The catcher interfered with the ball before it reached dead ball territory.

I'm guessing the call would be different in USA, where there is stealing to consider.

 

[irishmafia]

I kicked the question up the line and got a response from a Conference USSSA UIC. His response was that it should be called a Ball. The catcher interfered with the ball before it reached dead ball territory.

The explanation is absurd

 

[MaverickAH]

Where is this in the rule book? The only thing I can find says that it is a ball if the ball touches the ground before passing completely across home plate, or if the ball touches the plate. I can't find anything about the catcher catching the ball.

I would have a strike unless there is catcher's obstruction, or I was certain the ball was going to hit the plate.

And that's exactly what the ball did in this instance...….. Touch the ground before passing completely across home plate.

 

[Crusty]

Obstruction
B. Obstruction is the act of a fielder which impedes the batter from striking at a pitched ball.

THE CATCHER MUST:
A. Be in and remain in the lines of the catcher’s box when the pitcher is in position
and remain until a pitched ball has reached or passed home plate, or is batted.

These are really the only rules I found that apply. And an argument can be made that the catcher did nothing wrong. If he was in the catchers area and reached forward prior to the ball touching the ground while it was in the strike zone to make it appear more like a strike then he hasn’t violated the second rule posted here. As well as it can be argued that he is not in violation of the first rule either because the ball is too deep for the hitter to even hit it at that point. He is not blatantly hindering the batter from hiring the ball he is trying to get a strike call. Tbh the batter should back up to the back of the box and take his hand off. He won’t ever do it again. The only real basis that an umpire could claim for calling it a ball is that he is not allowing the ball to travel completely through the zone allowing the umpire to make an accurate call. But in your case it appears as though you got a clear look at the pitch and where it was traveling through the zone and made the decision it was a strike. I don’t see anything wrong with that. You can’t really call interference imo unless the batter hits him.

 

[DeputyUICHousto]

I kicked the question up the line and got a response from a Conference USSSA UIC. His response was that it should be called a Ball. The catcher interfered with the ball before it reached dead ball territory.

I'm guessing the call would be different in USA, where there is stealing to consider.

The batter didn't swing at the pitch unless that was omitted from the OP. How could you have interference? This should be a strike!

 

[jbo911]

The ops description of the events is ridiculous, and it's obvious that a lot of you have different interpretations of what happened.

Without knowing whether he meant forward when he said up or not, it's impossible to reach all of the conclusions here.

It would definitely be a ball i the conference because it didn't land on the dime behind home plate.

 

[Country469]

It can even land on the dime, but it has to cross exactly at your penis level.

Trust me I know.

 

[ureout]

It can even land on the dime, but it has to cross exactly at your penis level.
Trust me I know.

country... rumor has it that if the pitch has to cross exactly at "your" penis level then that umpire would be calling a very SMALLLL AND LIMITED strike zone