Call I had not seen in 27 years of coaching...

[parrothead]

Not sure what you mean by intentional? Batter runner was RH batter who was up in the front of the box started making their way towards the line but left foot as running up first was inside the line, the right foot was in the running lane, so it was the correct call of intereference, but not something they were trying to interfere with the throw, they just didnt realize exactly where they were in terms of the lane.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by parrothead

Not sure what you mean by intentional?

INT = Interference, not intentional.

[thumpferee]

Originally Posted by parrothead

Not sure what you mean by intentional? Batter runner was RH batter who was up in the front of the box started making their way towards the line but left foot as running up first was inside the line, the right foot was in the running lane, so it was the correct call of intereference, but not something they were trying to interfere with the throw, they just didnt realize exactly where they were in terms of the lane.

Unless edited, I don't see intentional mentioned.

INT=Interference

[parrothead]

Nevermind I saw the INT, but that is intereference, yes it was interference for sure - I misread the post.

One thing is we had him later in the day and he and I were talking and said as he thought about the call, he was saying he thought he should have called the lead runner out and left the runner at 1st instead of 2nd, but that made no sense to me because the play was being made on the runner he did call out and batter was for sure out.