Mrumpiresir,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrumpiresir
The OP said fielder stopped to avoid the collision. Are you saying R1 did not hinder the fielder?
|
It is likely that is the proper call described in the OP. None of us other than JPaco saw the play, so I certainly can't say for sure.
While you don't NEED contact for interference in this sitch, it sure helps. In order to call the Int. here you would need to further judge that there WOULD have been contact had the runner's actions FORCED the fielder to abort his attempt to field the batted ball - rather than the fielder stopping because he thought their MIGHT be contact.
If the runner obviously alters his path or timing to maximize the fielder's difficulty, the fielder gets some benefit of the doubt. If the runner is making a "good faith" effort to advance and avoid the fielder, AND there is no contact, the runner gets the benefit of the doubt.
You will definitely be having a conversation following this call. Be prepared for it.
Quote:
|
I guess a smart fielder should have run into the runner drawing the call, possibly injuring himself or the runner. Interference by R1.
|
That's pretty much what the fielder SHOULD have done. Baseball can be a dangerous game. When I was coaching, I instructed my fielder's to field as if the runner weren't there - because it was the runner's responsibility to not be there.
I can only think of one instance where I saw this called without contact, and it was pretty obvious.
JM