Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron
8-4-2b includes within interference the concept that the runner "illegally alters the actions of a fielder in the immediate act of making a play." So if the umpire meant that the alteration in the fielder's play was the result of the runner's action, then yes the interpretation is correct.
To judge whether the rule was correctly applied by the umpire in this case, I would have to see the play or have a more complete description.
|
That's what I said -- you just used more words. 
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”
West Houston Mike
|