No, it was noted that if it interferred with the defender taking a throw at first she was out. The problem was the statement in general and the fact that the slide showing the comment stood alone without mention of the interference part.
I talked to the Fed rules interpreter (who is also one of my deputies which some of you know) and she agreed that the presentation was poorly worded, but it is what the NFHS provided, so it is what is given. I try not to interfere with her clinic and usually limit myself to one question per (and she hates that
) and I already used up my self-imposed limit.
Part of my issue here is that the state HS association puts the coaches and umpires together for this clinic and I can just see a coach arguing a runner should be out because she did not run in the 3' lane. Yeah, I know it sounds ridiculous, but so is, "she turned left, she's out" argument from some coaches, but we still get that on the field.
I can also see some inexperienced umpire buying into the bull because s/he wasn't paying attention. The umpire side can be handled via additional clinic prior to the season, assuming they attend.
We have all experienced the debate among experienced umpires over something as simple as "will vs. shall vs. may" wording. The umpire will understand (hopefully) the correct application through clinics and meetings. But we don't need to have an on-field argument and protest from a coach simply because an administrator did not set-up a presentation correctly.