Quote:
Originally posted by WestMichBlue
Normally interference is defined as hindering a defender from making a play. (Play = fielding or throwing.) However, when a ball is deflected off one defender, ASA rules that interference must hinder a second defender from making an out.
Due to player speed on the small base paths, unless a ball is deflected near the base or the batter-runner, the defense is not going to get an out if they don't field the ball cleanly on their first opportunity. So the rule makes sense, because the defense should not get an out they had no chance even had interference not occured.
However, ASA puts a kicker in the rule by requiring that the act of interference be intentional. Now, IMO, we can rob the defense of a legitimate out. Suppose a line drive deflects off the pitcher towards 2B. Ball, fielder, and runner arrive at the same spot at same time. F4 should be able to pick up ball and either tag R1 or 2B and get an out, but F4 collides with R1 and is unable to field the ball.
Suppose the ball deflects off F1 across the foul line towards 1B. F3 and B-R collide in the 3' lane and F3 is unable to pick up ball and tag B-R.
In both cases we have an accident, not deliberate contact by the runner. So you cannot call interference and the defense is robbed of a possible out.
I do not believe that the word "intentional" belongs in this rule. What say you?
WMB
|
If the batted ball starts one way, how is a runner to know that a DEFENDER caused the ball to go another? The DEFENDER who missed their opportunity to field the ball is the individual who caused the problem to start. More often than not, such an event will occur too quickly for the coaches to provide any guidance.
Just as I submitted a rule change for interferring with a U3K, anytime the defense is the cause of a change in direction of a ball, you cannot expect the offense to avoid something they believe is going elsewhere that is not in front of them. The offense did not cause the situation to occur and should not be held liable for the defense's action.
That is why it requires intent and I don't believe it will be changed anytime soon. Personally, this sounds like someone trying to apply a baseball mentality to an ASA softball rule.