Quote:
Originally Posted by UMP25
I
You are referencing the wrong rule. The player is no longer a batter; therefore, any interference must be INtentional. It wasn't. Consequently, it was an incorrect call and incorrect ruling.
|
I'm willing to agree with you that it is the wrong call. I don't see INT here.
My point, however, was not that the call was right, but that the RULING - based on the assumption that the call is right - is the correct ruling. And the CALL is purely judgement. I will admit I see why you feel the rules state that interference on a throw by BR must be intentional to be called. I think you should also admit that the rules are not as clear as they should be regarding this.