Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA
I don't think there is even a doubt F3 could have made that play even though she did call for a throw around the runner.
The replay portion was pretty clear to me. That is a lane violation except in the associations that do not utilize a double base.
I believe it is only right because the NCAA absolves the BR of lane violations for the last step to 1B
NCAA Rule 12.2.4.2 The batter-runner may not run outside the base runner’s lane and, in the umpire’s judgment, interfere with the fielder taking the throw at first base. Exception: The batter-runner may run outside the base runner’s lane: (a) if she has not yet reached the start of the runner’s lane; (b) to avoid a fielder attempting to field a batted ball; or (c) if she leaves the lane on her last stride in order to touch first base.
Of course, now the argument may come up that she couldn't leave the lane in which she was never located, but I don't think that would carry to a reversal.
I thought it was interesting that the play was already going to 1B and the PU was making a safe signal. I would love to see if he stepped out to trail the BR which is not on any of the video.
|
The video was not playing well on my computer last night. The clarity of the play without skipping might may a difference in my opinion of the play.
I do think there is an argument to be made for not granting the exception on leaving the lane for a last step when you have never been in the lane to begin with. To leave something you must have been there in the first place.
I still don't know if the throw would have beaten her to the base had the runner been using a double base. It would have been a bang bang play at the base.
I do think the reason interference was not called was the NCAA rule regarding the last step, which also explains the lack of argument on the call.