|
In the rule proper, they state interference must be committed, hence a play must be being made.
Yet, the penalty seems to provide an enforcement for when there was no play (and hence no interference).
Perhaps what the penalty means by "not obvious" is that the runner who is being played on is not obvious... but if that is so, why is no runner out (as opposed to the closest to home being out)? If there was interference, somebody is out.
I agree... not clearly written.
__________________
Tom
|