[rwest]

....when I saw my post on officalforum.com. Here's the reply I got and my comment.


From AtlUmpSteve....

We don't yet have the official interpretation how to call this revised rule, but I suspect, from all I have heard, that your play is either a "no call" or an unsportsmanlike act by F6, if it is deemed intentional by the umpire.

The purpose of this rule change, as I understand it, is to now penalize acts of interference that were previously ignored by an umpire because the umpire couldn't or wouldn't judge intent. It will require an actual "act" of interference, something specificly done to interfere, something more substantive than simply running the bases in a proper and legal manner. In this play, waving the arms, kicking out the leg to hit the ball, or altering the path knowingly, would qualify.

If the shortstop hits the runner who is doing nothing abnormal, it is E6, not interference; or else it may be an ejection, in an obvious and extreme case by F6.
__________________
Steve Marcus


And my reply....


That makes sense and thats how I would call it. A runner should not be penalized for running the bases in a normal fashion. It dawned on me after I wrote my first point that ASA was just removing the need to judge the act as intentional. The actions that would constitute interference are probably still the same, now we just don't have to determine if it was accidental or intentional. The runner would still have to do something beyond normal action that would interfere with the defenses ability to make an out. I also noticed that ASA put in a definition for making a play. I like the added definition.