Quote:
Originally Posted by Gulf Coast Blue
Thank you to Rachel for getting this back on track. I could also argue either side of the point in ASA......but I believe that the way the rule is written an out must be called here.
I take it by Mike's silence that there is some dissension in the ASA ranks on whether an out should be called in this situation or not.
As to my opinion.....I believe an out should be called........not that it means anything......... 
Joel
ps....Rachel.....you are one of the best minds in the country......what is your take on this?
I would also like to hear from AtlSteve and others! |
I appreciate you asking, although I am pretty sure I am not one of those Rachel referred to. But I was at the same place, albeit not part of this discussion. I would guess the ones Rachel is referring to comes from the following Colorado Fireworks list: Emily A, Donna V, Willie N, Smokey E, Steve A, Kevin D, Dave N. Pretty great list, and I enjoyed listening to them on any number of topics.
I am going to disagree with something Andy said, and that, to me, is the key point. If we can say that a position behind the line between two defensive players is "behind" when relating to umpire interference, then that precedent has to also relate to runner interference. Behind is behind, not behind is not behind; there can't (shouldn't) be different interpretations based on who/what you are!!
And I agree with Rachel when she goes back to the intent of the rule (and definition of interference) that someone be disadvantaged for there to be a call. That is the basic difference with baseball; in baseball, if the ball contacts a runner, it is always interference, NO MATTER WHERE the defense is playing, in softball, it is meant to only be inteference if the contact stops the defense from making an apparent play. I know calling interference always is the easiest call to sell on this play (because of baseball); but it isn't always the right call in softball.
Still missed out on the conversation Rachel references; but would have loved to have been a fly on that wall.