Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA
Why is it interference? How does it possibly interfere with any defensive player executing a play? The pitcher still delivers the pitch. The catcher cannot have a play until she gets the ball.
You are aware that this is just another version of what has been going on for a few years where the batter intentionally swings early and hits the ball on the follow through. It's nothing new and legal. Just a bit of deception trying to get the infield back on their heels. If you are going to start ruling this interference, what do you call a pitcher with a great change-up that fools the batter?
|
If this response was for me ... you are severely stretching my words. I said (twice, I believe) that the OP was nothing and that the sitch added by MNBlue was almost definitely just a strike. I'm not going to "start ruling" that this was interference ... unless it was, and it would have to be ridiculously late to even consider interference. You seem to think I was advocating INT, when I was in fact arguing just the opposite and trying to make the point that it would have to be EXTREMELY obvious that it was not an attempt to hit the ball for INT to even be a glimmer of thought on the horizon. If you're responding to him, and not me ... well ... nevermind.
__________________
"Many baseball fans look upon an umpire as a sort of necessary evil to the luxury of baseball, like the odor that follows an automobile." - Hall of Fame Pitcher Christy Mathewson
Last edited by mcrowder; Wed May 16, 2007 at 04:10pm.
|