|
Re: Re: Re: RE;Dropped 3rd
[/QUOTE]
Maybe so, but still the interference by a retired runner must be intentional - perhaps you could say the runner (B2) was intentionally trying to draw a throw to 1B, but that did not happen. It would be a big stretch to say B2 was intentionally interfering with the throw to 2B. [/B][/QUOTE]
Really? I don't think it's that far of a stretch. When playing, I use to establish my basepath so it would take me between the throw and the base every time I could. Many players to this and there is no rule to prevent them from doing it.
Also, B2 was never a runner. B2 was never a batter-runner. B2 was only a batter and the rule book says that when a batter affects the play while out of the batter's box is interference and no intention is required.
Like I said before, but the ASA book, Steve M's ruling is probably the most viable. Not because of a particular rule stating so, but the lack of a specific rule addressing the situation.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|