View Single Post
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 08, 2016, 11:45am
CecilOne CecilOne is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve View Post
You are allowing continuing play after blatant and malicious interference? How do you support that?

I don't care which ruleset (and believe there is more to be said to each), but the DDB on the IP has to end when the runner commits interference.

As to the rest, here's some thoughts to consider with each ruleset.

Does/should the option to enforce the IP rather than the result of the play erase a malicious act along with the rest of the play?

Does interference supercede an IP (like it does obstruction)?
OK, correct, IMMEDIATE DB for INT, no continuing play.
I should have stayed with face value and not try to overthink.

That means B2 can't be safe and B2 would get a ball in the count and finishes batting if IP penalty stays. But, the INT penalty awards B2 1st base, so the IP is ignored.
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT.
It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
Reply With Quote