[GA Umpire]

INT is the call of any umpire who sees it. Generally, it is the one closer but, in this case, it was a matter of the runner crossing in front of F2's throw. That would be PU's call since he can see this from his vantage point.

Now, with that said, this is not INT. Not even close. R3 would have to grab F5 as he is sliding head first or something.

Also, I don't see it to be the BU's call to huddle on the call or get involved. It's NOT his decision. It is the decision of the calling umpire or maybe, UIC if one is appointed. Those who say PU poached the call I would think would agree that once he did, the BU would be poaching on his responsibilities on that end.

PU screwed up and made a call which wasn't correct. Also, it wasn't a misapplication but a misjudgment. He stated "The runner did it on purpose" which equates to intent though I don't agree with it but it was in his judgment. BU shouldn't have said what he did to anyone but his partner if his partner asked and away from everybody. The reason is if his partner decided he may be wrong, he can't use a conference to say to his partner "I was wrong and need to correct. Just wanted to conference to make it look like we worked it out." Now, he can't use that and pretty much, had to stick with his call even if he did feel it was wrong afterward. There are reasons why the non-calling umpire keeps quiet about a play.

There were mistakes made. But, the biggest one would have been the BU trying to change a call in which he had no business being a part of once the PU made it. The PU owned his call unless convinced otherwise to ask about it which he didn't. So, BU stayed out of it as he should.