[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by reccer

I readily agree F4 was attempting to field a deflected batted ball and that she had an opportunity to make an out. Therefore, F4 is not guilty of obstruction

BU readily agrees that there was no intentional interference on the part of R1.

Since BU agrees no intentional interference, according to the rule (not the supplement) train wreck and play on.

You got the rule wrong.. intent is not the issue here.

Your bolded statement is the answer.

That is interference.

You cant just disregard the rules supplement willy nilly. It is put there as a supplement for a reason.