Quote:
Originally Posted by EsqUmp
The runner's positioning causes and (sic) altered throw, which affects the fielder taking the throw at 1st base. It's not as technically literal as many umpires make it out to be.
That would be like saying that when the catcher drills the BR 35 feet up the base line, BR didn't affect the fielder's ability to take the throw at 1st base. What affected the play was the fact that the catcher threw the ball into BR's back.
|
It goes right back to the concept of a "quality throw". Just because the batter-runner got hit, it doesn't mean that the throw was directed at the fielder taking it and reasonably catchable. If the B/R is 35 feet up the line, but the throw is angled across the line and away from the fielder (perhaps aimed at the B/R in an attempt to get a cheap out), rather that up the line (directed at a fielder at first base), then it wouldn't be a quality throw and it wouldn't be interference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EsqUmp
The only difference in logic might be how an umpire can interpret what the catcher is doing and why they are doing it (e.g., looping the ball over the runner). Well, that's pretty obvious.
|
But your point isn't obvious. If F2 loops one over the BR and the fielder, such that it can't possibly be caught, are you saying that would be interference because the catcher "altered her throw"? Or, are you saying that it obviously isn't?