Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mick
Since I am not a real softball umpire, I am trying to understand the context of your quotes.
Intentionally interfering, or incidentally interfering, surely applies to all bases.
|
First, intention on interference was taken out, but few umps ever changed how they call it.
I have been told. That with the change in the rule, a runner sliding into third and a thrown ball hits them in the back of the head when they start their slide, they are out. It does not matter anymore that there was no intent to interfere. I have never called it like that. I will not speak for anyone else, but I think few will call interference like that without intent.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mick
Is there a specific case where running inside the lane to first base is interference when the ball is thrown on a path that excludes the BR?
Thanks.
|
OK, lets look at this.
1. BR inside running lane
2. I do not get what you mean by "excludes the BR"
I will tell you that while in the running lane there is not much, if anything, that will get the BR called out for interference on a thrown ball.
Also with the double first base I know I have found there is little problem with the running lane. If they are inside the lane they are more likely to run to the white section and it is a easy appeal play.