[UMP25]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

The huddle wasn't going to change this. Taking that long to figure out what to do in the case of interference was a bit embarrassing. But once PU declares interference, the result was actually the correct result.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

While I didn't see interference, I'm not quite sure what the other umpires could have done. Given that it was called, I think the correct ruling was made (BR out, R1 returns).

Maybe (and this is pure speculation, I admit), PU has the BR timing his movement across the plate to get in F2's way ==> intentional interference with a throw.

Until (and If) something comes out from NCAA, I don't know that we'll know what happened and whether it was just judgment, or a rule, or what.

One cannot have batter interference on a catcher's throw to retire R1 when R1 cannot be retired due to the batter receiving a base on balls. I'm willing to bet the PU forgot that it was a walk and instead instinctively ruled a batter's interference here, which it wasn't. Because it wasn't, the little umpire crew confab should have reversed it and ruled that no interference actually occurred.