Quote:
Originally Posted by lawump
Some of those supervisors, however, would hold that if the contact had been more severe that would cause it to rise to the level of interference. Other supervisors would hold that it would not be interference. Hence, for some supervisors the degree of contact is the major determining factor as to whether or not this is interference...they outright reject my categorical approach.
|
Oh hell no...
And I outright reject this notion that "degree of contact" should be a determining factor. Geez, are we now supposed to make a judgment on "how hard is hard" to decide?
Taking intent out of the equation, interference is judged simply by determining whether or not a protected fielder was obstructed, impeded, hindered, or confused. Even the slightest contact--hell, you don't even NEED contact in some situations--will lead to this.
Judging contact severity to determine whether or not interference took place would be like judging how little or how much a runner slows down or deviates to judge obstruction. No thanks! When it happens, it happens.
As for the main subject, it's sorta disheartening that there is no consensus on this. I guess we will all A2D until something is definitively written that addresses the situation.