Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Durham
Also, working 2 man from the working area on this play you are probably looking through the pitchers back. You don't have super slow motion or even real time video to look at on the play. You can't tell if he has the ball or not but he is on top of it. What would you call? In a game I am gonna grab the non ****ty end of this stick and get INT. I'll get an arguement, but not a protest. Espeacially when I am not 100% if he has the ball in his hand or not. I'll let you know what the ruling ends up being.
|
I can understand not being willing to rule OBS because you think the fielder may have the ball (in hindsight on video, it would turn out that your were wrong and that this was, indeed, OBS ... but you couldn't be blamed for missing a judgement call that close).
But how in the world would ANYONE justify interference on a runner who was running in the basepath inadvertently colliding with a fielder who had the ball and crossed his path? Surely INT is not even an option here unless BR pushed the fielder.
This is either nothing (F1 had the ball) or OBS (F1 did not have the ball) ... and based on the video the right call turns out to be OBS.
Also - I don't see anything protestable at all - it's judgement whether this was nothing or OBS - no rule was misinterpreted here.