![]() |
|
|||
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: In the past.......
Is it possible to have contact and no interference? Sure, it's possible and that is what in fact seemed to have happened on the play described in this thread.
Unfortunately, that would involve some sort of delayed interference/play-on-advantage theory type rule which is not yet a rule covering interference. That may be something that could be investigated as a rules change. The rules as currently written are clear and unambiguous. The runner must avoid the fielder, period. If he does not, ie. he makes contact with the fielder, he has interfered. I think this makes our jobs easier. If there is contact, it is interference. Kill the play, enforce the penalty. And it is an easy explanation to the coach. Basically, contact=interference. He may not like it, but thems' the rules. Anyone who enforces this rule differently makes another umpires life difficult if they get the same play afterwards. Quote:
__________________
Well I am certainly wiser than this man. It is only too likely that neither of us has any knowledge to boast of; but he thinks that he knows something which he does not know, whereas I am quite conscious of my ignorance. At any rate it seems that I am wiser than he is to this small extent, that I do not think that I know what I do not know. ~Socrates |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|