Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakota
Let's be clear, though, Joel, the runner touching the fielder who is touching the plate is not the runner touching the plate, so if all the runner does is touch the fielder's foot, the runner has NOT touched the plate.
What you are saying is that, due to the human running motion (e.g. heel down, foot rocks forward, pushes off with the toes), it is so highly UNLIKELY that the runner would touch ONLY the fielder's foot, that the umpire SHOULD consider this as touching the plate.
At least, I think that is what you are saying. And, taking the technical way and ruling that the runner did not touch the plate is looking for trouble with something you could not possibly see with certainty.
|
Well.......I am 99% sure that this came from an ASA NUS instructon (either through an NFHS clinic or ASA, I am not sure.....albiet several years ago)........if this is the way they wanted it called, that is the way it is going to be called.
In all honesty, all of my notes on my clinics and what not are not handy........I do remember that this all started from a BR missing 1st prior to F3 receiving the throw and warped into this very scenario...........
We discussed it much longer than it should have been.
Also, when a foot goes over another foot on the plate, are you ever going to be sure that the runners foot did not touch the plate.........I think that was the consensus. You have to remember too, that this was discussed over a 10-20 minute period in a clinic and not 12 plus hours on a message board.
I stick by my original statement.
Joel