View Single Post
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 31, 2011, 12:49pm
Gulf Coast Blue Gulf Coast Blue is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Gulf Coast of TX to Destin Fl
Posts: 988
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncalblue View Post
One of the first High School games of the season (raining since March 7th) and here we go...

No out- R1 at 2nd, R2 at 1st, B3 hits ball between F7 & F8- R1 rounds 3rd and scores when F8's throw home beats her, but the ball is knocked out of F2's glove/tag, and rolls 6' away.

You guessed it- here comes R2 to the plate while F2 & R1 are still tangled up at the plate. R1 has rolled on top of F2, who actually heaves R1 off her in an attempt to retrieve the ball and make a play on R2. R1 made no immediate or obvious attempt to clear the plate after scoring, but obviously did not intend on interfering with F2.

I am PU, and kill the play just as R2 approaches home (she does weave thru R1 & F2's legs to touch the plate) calling R2 out on R1's scored runner interference. BR3 ends up at 3rd, where BU thinks she belongs, but my opinion was BR3 should be put back at 1st, the last base obtained at the time of the throw home (she hadn't reached 2nd before the dead ball)
OC comes unglued saying R1 didn't try (intend) to hinder F2's attempt to stay with the play. The rule change has removed intent from the equation, leaving it to U's judgement whether or not interference occured. OC may have had a point last season, but not now?

Agree or disagree here? - Thanks
If the interference occured while the BR was between 1st and 2nd, the BR should go back to 1st as you stated. If the interference occured after the BR had passed 2nd then that is where she had been placed. Not sure what your BU was thinking.......but the BR is only entitled to the base granted by the interference rule.

Joel
Reply With Quote