Originally Posted by
CajunVic
So you saying only one out. If the catcher still makes the out on the runner regardless of the interference, no penalty to the batter and he retains his bat. If the catcher does not make the out, batter is out?
Question: on the second scenario, should not the runner be made to go back to first? Why should there be any benefit from the interference? If that is the case, couldn't the batter just tackle the catcher to advance a runner rather than depend on the sac bunt?
Edit: never mind, second instance the batter out was third out so no need to address runner. If that would have been an earlier out, I presume runner would have been moved back to first.