Runner Interference

[MT 73]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

It the runner did nothing wrong then there is no interference because interference is something wrong.

If the fielder held up unnecessarily it's on him. He needs to expect that the runner will be running past him.

If the runner's action necessitated an alteration of the fielder's effort then it's interference.

And contact is not required

That is how I called it.
The runner held up a split second to avoid being hit by the line drive and continued running immediately after avoiding contact.
F6 was confused by this and dropped what should have been an easy catch.
The defensive coach went to the PU who then came to me saying the D.C. Was looking for an interference call.
I said that in my judgement R2 had done nothing wrong, which is why I did not call it.
At the time I was 97% sure-- now I am 99.9% sure it was the right call.

[robbie]

Originally Posted by MT 73

That is how I called it.
The runner held up a split second to avoid being hit by the line drive and continued running immediately after avoiding contact.
F6 was confused by this and dropped what should have been an easy catch.
The defensive coach went to the PU who then came to me saying the D.C. Was looking for an interference call.
I said that in my judgement R2 had done nothing wrong, which is why I did not call it.
At the time I was 97% sure-- now I am 99.9% sure it was the right call.

Conclusion very likely correct.
However "R2 had done nothing wrong" is irrelevant.
Your statement needs to be "R2 did not interfere."

Your judgement:
Did R2 interfere?
If yes, dead ball, Interference.
If no, no interference, play on.