Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CoachJM
DAC,
Thanks.
I assume you did not change the call because, at the time, you and your partner felt it was the correct call?
Is there anything the coach could have done differently that might have resulted in you changing the call?
For example, instead of acting like a jerk (which it sounds like he did), he had:
1. calmly requested time and, after granted, politely asked you if you had seen the contact between the runner & fielder (sounds like you did)
2. asked you if, in your judgement, the fielder was making a legitimate attempt to field the ball at the time of the contact & was the player who had the best play on the ball (sounds like he was)
3. suggested that, as he understood the rules, the runner should be called out for interference because 7.09(l) says he should if he "fails to avoid" the fielder in this situation (which it does).
Would you have done anything differently?
Assuming after all of that, you informed the coach that your initial ruling was going to stand and he then informed you he was protesting your ruling, thanked you for entertaining his appeal, and promptly returned to the dugout. Would you have done anything differently then?
JM
|
JM,
Knowing what I know now, I would have called interference on the runner. F6 did not intentionally run into the runner. He was just going after the ball.
At the time, I don't think there was anything he could've done for me to change the no-call. I felt the runner did nothing wrong and there was only accidental contact (no harm, play on).
I brought it up in my association meeting and there were mixed opinions. However, no one thought F6 obstructed the runner. Either, no-call or interference on runner. Since there were two outs already, runner's out and inning over.
Thanks,
DAC