Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wadeintothem
I can't imagine that there is a problem at any decent level of umpiring where the above listed play is being called INT. I dont think I've ever seen it called.
|
I can because I have seen it. Think about the umpire that call OBS because a catcher is standing in the baseline while the runner is rounding 3B. Think about the umpire ejects a player for throwing a bat back toward the dugout; not in anger, to be have it put away. Think of......well, you get the idea.
There are still too many "black and white" umpires that do NOT get the proper instruction, interpretation or just want to apply THEIR personal interpretation to a rule. Teams which travel to multiple tournaments see these guys/gals all the time in different cities and it drives the coaches nuts.
Remember a year or so ago when a poster noted that his UIC finally admitted that his (UIC's) belief that the ASA rule change for the previous year (requiring possession of the ball to avoid OBS) was not a mistake?
I believe this was either a state or metro UIC. Well, if a state or metro takes it upon themselves to make personal determinations on such a major rule change, what do you think happens with the interpreters/trainers/mentors at the local level?
There is very little question that those who work the upper-level NCs will/should not have a problem with applying the reworded rule on INT. However, you still need to worry about the other 30K plus and that is where my concern lies.