Quote:
Originally Posted by jicecone
Well put, however, we will never know if he could have caught it because of the spectators interference.
|
That
seems to be covered by Rule 3.16:
APPROVED RULING: If spectator interference clearly prevents a fielder from catching a fly ball, the umpire shall declare the batter out.
My logic goes like this. Since it would have taken an extraordinary effort for Reddick to have caught that ball, we can't assume he would have caught it. Therefore, the interference did not clearly prevent Reddick from catching that fly ball.
The reasoning is the same as if that ball went untouched by a fan and it bounced into and out of Reddick's glove. No one would give Reddick an error, even though he had a chance to catch the ball.