Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve
It strikes me that too many here are relying on EXACTLY what ASA attempted to take OUT of the decision process regarding interference. It does not appear anywhere in the rule that we need to consider even one little bit what a coach's intentions are. If 1) there is a possible play that can be interfered with, and if 2) the coach (or anyone else who is not a runner) physically assists a runner, either intentionally or unintentionally, the runner should be ruled out, according to the rule.
That said, I agree it is easier to ignore minor contact as incidental if you believe it is inadvertent; and I agree it is easier to consider a potential play has been available if the coach appears to intentionally contact. But, that is secondary thought process, not the basic rule. Let's not focus on secondary thoughts over the primary decision. Stay with the rule, AND the intent of the rule; you cannot disregard the rule itself.
|
The problem is that this is not interference, but it is simple. If the coach provides physical assistance, intentional or not, the runner is out.
However, it should be something the coach does that assists the runner. I believe I had a pretty good example of a no call a few years back where the 3BC was waving the runner around 3B while watching the ball in LF. Runner tripped and wiped out the coach. The runner without any help from the coach, got up and scored. The coach just laid on the ground. Did not turn, did not push the player up or off, just laid there.
AFAIC, the coach did not do anything to assist the runner.