Quote:
Originally Posted by RichMSN
I do not know why trained umpires call people idiots for saying obstruction instead of interference. Most people don't know the difference in terminology, but a casual viewer can easily understand what they mean.
I've had partners correct coaches when they say "interference" instead of "obstruction" and all it does is make the umpire look like an a$$hole. I will simply translate and respond as if the coach used the proper word the first time. Easy enough.
|
I have to disagree with you just a little bit on this issue. For one the people that say this are mostly on officiating boards like this or amongst other officials. But details matter and if someone uses the wrong term, it usually goes along with other misunderstandings. I do not know how many people call for a rules violation, and then do not understand the application. For example at least at the FED level, when there is an obstruction people think they get more than one base. I understand what you are saying, but details always matter and we know announcers start using terminology in all kinds of areas and they are completely wrong about the application.
I can think of the play that was posted here where there was a fly ball to center fielder that attempted to catch a ball then the ball hit the glove and went through his grasp and hit the ground. The announcer immediately started ripping the umpire and claiming that it was a catch because it hit the glove and the CF was just trying to make a throw. Well there is this little detail of rulebook language that talks about voluntary release and what constitutes a catch more than just hitting the glove. Details matter and add to the credibility of your argument. This is why I am actually impressed with announcers that use rulebook language in their explanation much more than those that use the terms that are either confusing or totally incorrect.
Peace