Thread: No Harm No Foul
View Single Post
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Thu Apr 04, 2002, 11:30am
SamNVa SamNVa is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 476
Send a message via ICQ to SamNVa Send a message via AIM to SamNVa Send a message via Yahoo to SamNVa
JC,

First things first, I don't consider play 2A to be interference. The runner was only doing what a runner is supposed to do, that is, get to the next base and avoid the ball, so unless F4 was hindered more than being momentarily blocked from seeing the ball, I have a no-call in that situation.

As for play 1 and play 2B, they are what they are because the rules say they are and the rules say they are based on over 100 years of playing the game. When the sport of baseball (from which softball was derived) was in it's early days, it wasn't the kinder and gentler game that we know today.

Play 1: Fielders who are not involved in the playing action are not allowed to hinder a runner in their attempt to advance on the bases. If F3 wants to watch the game, she should be sitting in the stands, otherwise she should doing something productive, but whateveer she is doing, she must stay out of the runner's way. In the early days of the sport, defensive player's would frequently position themselves in the runner's way as they attempted to run the bases. Nowadays that practice has been declared to be illegal.


Play 2B: Runners are supposed to be trying to advance on batted balls, especially when they are forced, however they must do this without impeding the defense's attempt to retire them. In the early days of the game, cagey runners would time their advances to position themselves such that the ball would "accidentally" carom off of a calf or a thigh, thus allowing all the runners to advance safely. Clearly this was not in the spirit of fair play, so along came a rule to prevent it. Now since it is difficult to judge intent in all cases, the simplest thing to do was to rule that if an offensive player interfered with a batted ball before a fielder had a chance to play on it, then the runner had interfered with the defense's attempt.

The rules makers realized that many times it is difficult to judge intent on a player's part and made it easier on us guys and gals in blue by removing intent as a factor in the call.

As always the opinions expressed here are my pi-onions and shouldn't be stinking up anybody else's yard.

SamC
Reply With Quote