Anyone have thoughts on this change?
Code:
The act of a defensive team member that hinders or
impedes a batter’s attempt to make contact with a pitch
or that impedes the progress of a runner who is legally
running the bases, unless the fielder is in possession of
the ball, is fielding a batted ball or is in the act of
catching a thrown ball. The act may be intentional
or unintentional and applies to live ball action only.
Quote:
Rationale: Replaces “about to receive” with “in the act
of catching” to better define the specific protected
action. “About to receive” is a longer time frame than
being “in the act of catching” a thrown ball.
|
I think the change makes sense in the intent of the rule, and the political context of NCAA where coaches
write have a high degree of influence on the rule book. However, I disagree with the rationale. I've been taught that ATR comes into play when the umpire judges the ball is closer to the fielder than is the runner. It's not perfect, but it works. I can think of numerous examples where the act of catching will lead to contact or a hindrance of a runner before the ball arrives.
When does the act of catching begin? When the ball begins to touch glove/player or when the throw is released and the player begins to adjust their position to the line of the throw?
When does the act of catching end? If a fielder stretches for a misthrow, and obstructs the runner after the ball has passed, is she still in the act?
Until I hear otherwise, I plan to enforce this the same way I enforced ATR, but I'll use the new book terminology when a coach wants to debate my judgment.