Quote:
Originally posted by Rich Ives
So why does the actual rule comment state "'right of way' is not a license to, for example, INTENTIONALLY trip a runner . ." ????
Remember, the runners heel hit the glove, not the glove hit the runner's heel. The runner tripped himself, the catcher didn't trip the runner.
|
It's another of those instances where it would be difficult to establish intent. Therefore, intent is established for the umpire via opinion and practice. This is also used in other such areas of "unintentional accidents" ruled interference like an "accidentally" kicked ball by a coach in the box.
Now, shoulder to shoulder tangle/untangle is a whole different perspective.
