Quote:
Originally Posted by GA Umpire
Why do you manipulate what is written to fit what you want?
Should read as blatantly and avoidably hinders a fielder's try to field a [fair or catchable batted ball or ] thrown ball.
Or, if you prefer:
blatantly and avoidably hinders a fielder's try to field a fair or catchable batted ball OR blatantly and avoidably hinders a fielder's try to field a thrown ball.
|
I am willing to discuss this if you promise not to state the catcher didn't need to occupy that space.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAump View Post
Roder
(1) blatantly and avoidably hinders [ a fielder's try to field a fair or catchable batted ball or ] thrown ball. A coach must try to avoid a fielder trying to field. If he tries to avoid, but contacts a fielder, it is not interference. In most cases, a coach who does not try to avoid contact with a fielder will have interfered. [5.08] [7.11]
Why do you manipulate what is written to fit what you want?
|
Would you rule any differently in the OP if we replace the thrown ball contacting ODH with the ODH accidentally contacting the catcher 10 to 15 feet from HP?
Instead of satirical quips, change fielder to monkeys, it doesn't affect your outcome anymore than the OP.
PITA! 
(1) blatantly and avoidably hinders [ a monkey's try to field a fair or catchable batted ball or ] thrown ball. A coach must try to avoid a monkey trying to field. If he tries to avoid, but contacts a monkey, it is not interference.
In most cases, a coach who does not try to avoid contact with a monkey will have interfered. [5.08]
[7.11]
It is physically impossible to interfere with a fair batted ball in the OP, not a thrown one.
If a runner unintentionally interfered with a fair batted ball, is he protected because it is impossible for him to accidentally interfere with a throw?