Quote:
Originally Posted by youngump
I think you're right in reading the communication problem. Now the thing I'm interested in is the second. What would you have to see to have interference there?
|
I'm not sure why that part is difficult. Understanding the timing on THIS play may be an issue (HTBT), but I think the ruling should be apparent.
My practical answer is if I believe R2 would be out if R1 wasn't in the way, then it is interference. R1 (a runner that has already scored) has no rule exemption to hinder the defense from making a play, unintentionally or otherwise (NOTE: no book in hand, in hotel room ready to go out my games of the day).
If I believe R2 would be safe regardless, then R1's position is immaterial. No possible out equals no play, so no interference.
I suppose the next post will include someone saying R1 was just doing what runners should do (slide, yes, but cover and block the plate, no), and/or that they cannot go 'poof' after scoring. Cite me a rule that supports anything but interference if a runner that has already scored actually hinders the defense from making a play.