runner struck by thrown ball

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by DG

This suggests that being less than half-way when struck is not interference so one could surmise that being more than half-way is.

That is quite a giant leap in logic. I could build a diagram based on any or all of the following logical fallacies:

False Analogy: the two objects or events being compared are relevantly dissimilar.

Style Over Substance: the manner in which an argument (or arguer) is presented is felt to affect the truth of the conclusion.

Accident: a generalization is applied when circumstances suggest that there should be an exception.

False Analogy: the two objects or events being compared are relevantly dissimilar.

False Dilemma: two choices are given when in fact there are three options.

Fallacy of Exclusion: evidence which would change the outcome of an inductive argument is excluded from consideration.

Just because an example was given in which a ficticous runner was not guilty of interference because he was less than halfway to second, does not necessarily mean that if he is past halfway, he is guilty of interference.
______________________________________________

Originally Posted by DG

PU should be watching the runner, not 2B, to see if there is a FPSR violation. BU has the play at 2B, and then the play at 1B.

The BU only relinqueshes his call at 2nd base when the throw turns him to 1st base. In this case, the throw hit the runner, so it is still the BU's call all the way.