Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder
I unignored you because someone I trust here told me you'd stopped putting words in peoples mouths and then arguing with those words they didn't say. He may have been wrong.
I did not say that every time a fielder double clutches, it's interference. I said that if a runner remains upright, veers toward the fielder and CAUSES him to double clutch, it's interference. If you, the umpire, rule that his action of running toward the fielder after being put out interfered with the ability of him to throw the ball - call it.
PS - what the heck do you mean by "it's just judgement and will get you home faster" ... if that's your mentality, then you want outs ... and interference here is an out - arguing AGAINST the interference as you are gets you less outs, getting you home slower. (Not that this is my criteria... just that your comment contradicts your argument).
|
You didn't say
VEERED in the post I quoted. The OP mentioned the runner was about 20 ft. away. Just curious where you got running toward a fielder, and the fielder double clutches it's interference in all codes from. Interference is a judgment call. I just don't see the play being interference in a 10U game. Big boys don't double clutch, they throw. Runner better be prepared to at least duck if the ball is going toward his head. Just ask Dizzy Dean.