(07-15-2019 05:16 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(07-14-2019 06:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

Quote:The batter shall be deemed to have chosen to become a
runner under this rule if (i) both of the batter’s feet leave the batter’s box,
and (ii) the batter, in the umpire’s judgment, demonstrates or otherwise
creates an impression of his intent to advance to first base.

So one is objective, and the other subjective to determine if he attempts.

Looks like batters better not step out of the batter box *at all* in the case of a wild pitch. Would love to see an astute catcher retrieve the ball and tag out the guy who steps completely out of the box and checks his cup after a WP.

Another situation happens on a WP I just thought about. Say a runner is on second and a WP. Almost *all* of the time as the catcher races to grab the pitch, the runner at least 'jumps around wildly' or goes like a banshee. At the same time the batters almost always race *out* of the batter's box so they cannot be called for interfering with any throw from the catcher.

What I usually see is that the batter stands still. Since doesn't really know which way the catcher is going to go, the best way too avoid committing interference is to stand still.

(07-14-2019 06:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  A smart catcher will pump the ball to chase the runner back, then amble over and tag the batter who has jumped away from the box to steer clear of interfering. Or, simply hold the ball threatening to throw and walk over and tag the guy who has correctly jumped out of the batters box to stay out of an interference issue.
Seems like a smart catcher can really cause the umpires some headaches with this rule.

I disagree. I don't think it will be hard at all for umpires to determine whether the batter made an attempt to run. They already make those kinds of determinations: did an infielder intentionally drop a line drive; did a baserunner (typically a batter on a third strike) abandon his attempt to advance; did a batter offer at a pitch. I don't see this one as any harder, or any more frequent.

(07-14-2019 06:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  The rule is clear, the batter takes both feet out of the box, he is deemed to have an intent to steal first. Kind of hard to argue the crystal clear language there.

Remember, we haven't seen the text of the rule; all we have seen is sound-bite reports and press releases. (As far as I can tell, NO ONE has thought to publish the actual rule, which seems weird.). My hunch is that:
- the rule really says "takes two feet out of the batter box in an attempt toward first base", or something like that;
- there are official interpretations that give further guidance, such as: "an obvious dive or jump to avoid being hit by a pitch should not be interpreted as an attempt toward first base".

(07-14-2019 06:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  If I were a manager I would tell my catchers to tag every batter after every wild pitch in light of the first portion of the rule.

While the wouldn't hurt the fielding time, I don't think it would be advantageous either. The approved interpretations almost certainly instruct the umpires not to make it a "gotcha" play. If the batter has barely moved, or has moved away first base, they won't give the catcher an out for tagging him.

I think you are most correct when you say the actual language of the rule should be ascertained. I am using the only source I could see --- which is the bare objective 'two feet leave the batters box language'.