Quote:
Originally posted by JJ
I disagree. It's not interference if nobody tries to advance. It's a dead ball and nobody may advance. NCAA 6-2-d. In PRO it says "before the catcher has securely held the ball" - IMO, if the catcher catches the pitch and the batter's backswing knocks it out of his glove, the catcher has NOT securely held the ball. If no runner is trying to advance I have a dead ball, no interference. Of course, if the catcher catches the ball, and the batter turns around and clubs him because the catcher says, "I'd hate to see your girlfriend if you thought that looked pretty good", THEN I would probably have interference... NAPBL 4-11.
|
Let's see: On the one hand we have, in order, Childress, Willson, Porter, Jaksa, Roder and on the other Freix and JJ. I like my chances.
You make an interesting argument.
First, you contend it's not interference because a runner didn't try to advance. That's absolutely irrelevant to the interference statute, which punishes an illegal act regardless. OBR 2.00 Interference (a) makes it clear that the offense may not "hinder" a fielder making a play. Gloving a pitch
is making a play. Note the language at 2.00 Obstruction, which also explains what "making a play" is.
Second, you quote the NCAA rule when the book under discussion is the OBR. That's another irrelevant argument.
BTW: This thread has revealed a heretofore undiscovered (because it was unannounced) editorial difference in the NCAA language at 6-2d. Through 1999 the statute read: "
before [my emphasis] the pitch is caught." In 2000 the clause became: "
as [my emphasis] the pitch is caught." Though the new word does seem to lengthen the time frame for allowing "weak" interference, the editor apparently did not think it significant enough to bring the change to our attention.
Since the OBR language is "before the catcher has
securely [my emphasis] held the ball," I don't think there's a millimeter's difference in the two statutes after all.
Finally, here's the most amazing sentence of all. You write:
If the catcher catches the pitch and the batter's backswing knocks it out of his glove, the catcher has NOT securely held the ball."
No sh*t, Sherlock!
That's a joke, right?
[Edited by Carl Childress on Mar 16th, 2001 at 10:22 AM]