Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dakota
You are both seeing something in the OP I don't see at all, absent the use in the OP of the word "intentionally."
|
And therein lies the rub. It is this word you are deleting from the post that makes all the difference. If you take away "intentionally", then I agree with you and Mike - obvious obstruction, no thought of interference, MC, USC, or any of the rest. And I stressed at least twice that if you, the umpire, are going to call INT on this play, you'd better be 1000% sure that the contact was created by the runner, and it was intentional, and it was not an attempt to reach the base.
The thing I saw in the OP that lead me down that path was that word, "intentionally". I took OP at his word that this contact was indeed intentional, but emphasized that he'd better be sure.
Quote:
|
"R1 slides but instead of sliding into the bag, she intentionally slides into the left ankle "
|
This implied to me a change of direction AWAY from the initial path toward the bag, and TOWARD the left ankle. If, as Mike implies might be the case, the runner was already outside the bag and didn't change direction INTO the fielder, but instead merely contacted an ankle that was in or near her original path, then I too have OBS.