View Single Post
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 30, 2004, 11:17am
IRISHMAFIA IRISHMAFIA is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally posted by Shmuelg
You know, personally, I would call BOTH plays from SamNVa and FUBLUE as:

Out. (caveat: ISF rules, not ASA rules)

The reason being is that I'm not convinced that "possession" requires "control". Although to tag someone out, control must be there. Sam's catcher was in the act of fielding the ball, and IMO, had the right of way. FUBLUE's firstbaseman was also in the act of fielding the ball (albeit not the "batted" ball), and had the right of way.
Haven't my ISF book with me, but ASA basically copied ISF's rule and both have the same interpreter, Henry Pollard.

I don't think there is a difference. This is not a matter of a throw drawing the fielder into the runner's path, nor is it a matter of the defender trying to field or catch the ball. The defender made the error by failing to control the throw and than added to it by chosing to chase the ball across the runner's path.

The obstruction rule is there to protect runners from impediment due to instances not of their causing. Meanwhile, you are actually aiding a defender who made two mistakes on the play.

Yes, the book notes that the game itself forces opponents to cross paths, but I do not believe this is one of them. I'm not rewarding the runner anything, just protecting them to the base they would have reached had the defender not screwed up, TWICE!
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote