Quote:
Originally posted by Bfair
While I felt BU had the opportunity to witness F6 make his "veer", he did not. While I "guessed" that BU had witnessed that veering action, I didn't need to do that. Interference is not a dedicated call; a call designated to any specific official. Instead of "guessing" that BU had witnessd the needed information, I should have made the call. Doing so would have eliminated the judgment of "guessing" what BU saw, and the call would have been judged purely on the aspects of the play itself. ...
If it's proper for PU to make a call for obstruction---as some have said---then why would it be improper to do for interference? Both situations involve action relative to the decision that occurred while the BU had his back to the play despite BU's location being more proximate to the play.
|
I see where you are going with this, but I think you need to accept that the obstruction case is the exception rather than the rule. I don't see an exception when BU is
facing the point of play, even though he may have "missed" some preliminary input.
I strongly disagree with your underlying assertion that "
Interference is not a dedicated call". In fact the dedication of the call is clear and precise:
OBR 9.04(b)
A field umpire may take any position on the playing field best suited to make impending decisions on the bases. Duties shall be to:- Make all decisions on the bases except those specifically reserved to the umpire-in-chief;
- Take concurrent jurisdiction with the umpire-in-chief in calling "Time", balks, illegal pitches, or defacement or discoloration of the ball by any player;
Interference is NOT a call specifically reserved to the umpire-in-chief, by your own admission, therefore that call normally belongs to the base umpire "
on the bases", except at home base which is normally reserved to the plate umpire.
There is no argument that you probably had the better view of that play, BUT that is NOT your call to make. You can NEVER be sure what your partner saw until AFTER he has made his call, and by virtue of OBR 9.02(c) it is then too late for you to take the initiative and reverse the decision. Bottom line: That is NOT your call to make, right or wrong. You should NOT pre-empt your partner's calls on the bases simply because you suspect he may have missed something.
Your partner's back was NOT to the "play", or "attempted play", in your situation. He was facing the "play" when it was made. What he may or may not have seen was the preliminary action. By your own admission you weren't sure he had missed that action at the time of the call. OTOH, in the "off the ball" obstruction case you CAN be sure at the moment the obstruction occurred because your partner would obviously have his back to the action while following the ball. The clear distinction between INTERFERENCE and OBSTRUCTION is that only INTERFERENCE demands the
presence of the ball in proximity, and BU is entitled and required to be watching that. OBSTRUCTION, OTOH, usually requires the
absence of the ball in proximity; that's the difference.
The rules clearly PROHIBIT getting the call "right" IF that comes at the expense of "criticizing, seeking to reverse or interfering with another umpire's decision"(sic) [9.02(c)].
Hope this helps
Cheers