tattooed_ump_sports
Region: US
Friday 03 May 2024 21:18:53 GMT
33384
725
369
202
Music
Download
Comments
Boating :
Batter interference yes. But that was intentional and Busch League if taught by the coach.
2024-05-03 22:36:30
24
Jimmy Bartholomew :
You are correct with the rule, but if you look at the runner he wasn't attempting to steal.
2024-05-03 22:01:35
24
Brent Franklin :
But there was no runner anywhere 🤷🏼♂️
2024-05-03 22:33:15
20
cheatumcasey :
Not if I am calling the game. He is still in the batter's box and his movement is minimal at best, until he is hit by the catcher.
2024-05-03 21:32:32
10
Hobbes :
Once the batter moves, he opens himself up for interference
2024-05-03 23:51:03
8
Enoch :
to me it looks like even if he stood still, this was still hitting him
2024-05-03 22:49:50
8
JoeNathan3005|R3 :
Nah this isn’t interference at all. Batter doesn’t actually do anything to interfere.
2024-05-03 23:14:07
7
Ump Dad :
10000000000% batter is out for INF.
2024-05-03 21:46:04
5
james gray :
even if this is in the rules, when I played, 100% I'm trucking the catcher next time around even if I get thrown out.
2024-05-05 15:49:15
4
UmpingWithRPG :
The batter moved less than a Foot. (By rule = Batter Interference) However, This throw was intended to hit the batter. It was gonna hit the batter regardless. BTR- Out Ctr & Ch- Ejected
2024-05-04 12:57:03
4
Stephen Borders :
It is not a lack of know the rule. It is your interpretation. Your game, your call. I interpret it differently. Batter made no move or lack of move to hinder. Catcher moved into batter.
2024-05-04 02:24:22
4
therealjt_99 :
batter has a right to stay in the box it’s the catchers fault.
2024-05-03 21:58:51
3
gsmmh :
Batter Interference...Yes Untrained Catcher...ABSOLUTELY
2024-05-14 03:50:54
2
Goodie :
If third is empty wth is going on here? Unless there is something we can’t see that coach is catching hands
2024-05-04 03:15:14
2
user9571401771812 :
was there a runner on 3rd and attempted a back pick?
2024-05-04 03:15:07
2
WetAzWawdah :
The runner on 2nd never took off to 3rd, though.
2024-05-03 23:36:40
2
Daniel Lane :
This was 100% a malicious move. No runner was going or far enough off the bag to warrant a throw. If im that kids dad, im meeting coach in the parking lot after the game.
2024-05-03 21:43:03
2
Tyler Willingham(Cat dad/nerd) :
Did you see how fast the catcher threw the ball after catching it? There's no way the batter would have been able to move in time. How about the catcher watch where the fk he's throwing
2024-05-03 21:37:24
2
Marcos Bustamante :
I would have tossed the catcher and coach
2024-05-03 21:36:14
2
Diesel666 :
Had he stayed in the box he has no obligation to duck but he moved
2024-05-03 21:30:38
2
Sir Thomas Turkey :
It’s amazing how many people who think they know the rules think that as long as the batter is in the box, he can’t be called for interference.
2024-05-04 05:34:07
1
Bobby oh :
He was still in the box
2024-05-04 02:03:33
1
Matt V :
ahhh I disagree chief. 1/2 step backwards didn't hinder. granted these kids 11u maybe? kids didn't know or intentional but I can't agree batter interference.
2024-05-04 01:43:56
1
Dylan G :
This is absurd if simply stepping backwards is interference. Interference should require doing something. He’s getting beaned whether he moves or not. Terrible catcher.
2024-05-04 00:54:08
1
DarrenCooper71 :
It was intentional. Coach felt like previous e pitch catcher didn’t throw because of batter. Coach told him to throw through the batter. Technically ump could call batter interference but…
2024-05-04 00:46:15
1
To see more videos from user @tattooed_ump_sports, please go to the Tikwm
homepage.
