|
OK, if it is not obstruction because the fielder is still protected and it is not interference because the BR did nothing intentional, what is it?
Interference does indeed trump obstruction, but not the theory of possible interference. If the BR did nothing intentional, the BR has not committed interference, therefore there is nothing to trump obstruction.
In this situation (speaking ASA) the fielder is protected from intentional interference, not given carte blance to commit obstruction because she muffed the ball.
__________________
Tom
|