|
Over on eteamz Mike said "There are no train wrecks on a batted ball, the fielder has the right-of-way."
That got me thinking about when a RH batter bunts and starts towards 1B in fair territory, and the catcher is going for the ball - and they collide. No intent, neither one committed any overt act to impede the other; they just ran into each other.
I thought, from previous discussions here, that both had equal rights to that space and the call was accident - play on. Is it only on a thrown ball that an accident can occur?
Change the subject a bit. All books seem to say that Intent is not required for most charges of interference, and that contact is not necessary. The ASA POE uses the words visual distraction, or any type of distraction that would hinder a fielder in the execution of a play is grounds for interference.
The most blatent example of visual distraction occurs when a runner passes between the ball and the fielder, causing the fielder to momentarily lose sight of the ball. Yet if the fielder fails to make a play most of you say that the runner has the right to run to the base, and it is the responsibility of the fielder to maintain concentration and field the ball.
So what does it take to call interference if there is no contact? If a runner and fielder are on a collision course and at the last moment the runner spins away behind the fielder, but the fielder flinches (to protect herself) and misses the ball, is that interference? Or are we going to say that fielders need nerves of steel and are required to stay focused on their target and not be bothered by the runners action.
If a runner is pasing in front of a charging fielder, and the fielder hesitates to let the runner clear and the ball takes a bad hop off the fielders shoulder are we going to call interference because in one more step the fielder chould have short-hopped the ball and taken the bad hop out of play?
Can you give me examples of what you would call interference if there was no contact?
WMB
|