View Single Post
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 25, 2012, 10:05am
MNBlue MNBlue is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Plymouth, MN
Posts: 741
Send a message via Yahoo to MNBlue
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Ives View Post
I edited my quoted post while you were commenting.

The citation does not say interference must be ruled intentional. It says if ruled intentional get 2.

I think they blew it. It should have been protested so it got cleared up.
Actually it does say it must be ruled intentional:

Quote:
MLB Rule 7.08(b) Comment: A runner who is adjudged to have hindered a fielder who is attempting to make a play on a batted ball is out whether it was intentional or not. If, however, the runner has contact with a legally occupied base when he hinders the fielder, he shall not be called out unless, in the umpire’s judgment, such hindrance, whether it occurs on fair or foul territory, is intentional. If the umpire declares the hindrance intentional, the following penalty shall apply: With less than two out, the umpire shall declare both the runner and batter out. With two out, the
umpire shall declare the batter out.
If in contact with the base AND the hindrance is intentional, the penalty is both the runner and the batter are called out. If it is not intentional, you don't have interference.
__________________
Mark

NFHS, NCAA, NAFA
"If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?" Anton Chigurh - "No Country for Old Men"
Reply With Quote