Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA
I don't think so. What would confuse the player? EVERYONE knows you cannot come out of DBT and be engaged in the game, so where would there be any confusion?
Now, if the player entered the field and started running in the vicinity of the 3rd base line, that I could buy as INT. But it would still take something to convince me that player's presence interfered with the defense.
|
I'm having a little trouble following the thread, so let me try and restate a couple of scenarios and see if I've captured what you all think.
R1 scores while B2 reaches first. R1 enters the dugout and believes she missed the plate.
A) R1 returns to try and touch. F1 throws to F2 to tag her before she can retouch. B2 advances to second in the confusion.
B) B2 decides to go to second. While she is moving R1 returns to attempt to retouch. F4 takes the throw and throws home instead of tagging B2.
C) R1 returns to try and touch. B2 stays at first.
InsaneBlue, you're saying both A&B are interference, B2 out in both cases? Mike you're saying they are both not?
Insane you agree that we have no Int in C, yes?
Now, what if instead of R1, we have S3 running out to the plate to purposefully confuse the defense? Same answers?