View Single Post
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 24, 2009, 01:46pm
PeteBooth PeteBooth is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Newburgh NY
Posts: 1,822
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by gslefeb View Post
I'm trying to understand the "attempting to play" a ball be an infielder concept.

I had an umpire explain it to me this way:

1. R2, ball hit to short stop, the ball, SS and R2 arrive at the same time, therefore SS was in the act of playing the ball, interference on R2.

2. R2, ball hit to short stop - but SS has to charge the ball; as he is charging the ball R2 runs into him. The ump said no interference as SS was not in the act of fielding.

3. R2, ball hit to short stop - SS gets in R2's path and waits for the ball, R2 collides with SS (ball is still some 20 feet away); The ump said no interference as SS was in the act of fielding.

I disagree with 2 and 3; Does he have the rulings correct?
A fielder is protected from fielding a batted ball the MOMENT we judge said fielder in the "act of fielding" The protection remains in tact until the follow through of the ball from the fielder. HOWEVER, once the fielder gets rid of the ball then he better vacate or he THEN could be guilty of OBS.

As another poster mentioned the fielder's prtection also remains in tact if he initially mis-plays the ball but the ball is within a "step and reach" of said fielder.

The aforementioned is true for all codes

Pete Booth
__________________
Peter M. Booth
Reply With Quote