I'll try one last time. My concern is not with garden variety interference or the judgment of interference. My concern is that multiple posters wrote that this was not interference because there was play. You cannot use that as a reason when the FPSR is in effect. Every other type of interference requires an actual or impending play. If your rule that FPSR interference cannot be called in the OP because there was no play, you are wrong. If your rule that no interference took place for another reason, that is fine. I'm not going to argue about whether there was interference on this play; what I am arguing is that those who believe that the enforcement of the FPSR requires an actual or impending subsequent are wrong.

By rule, it's INT. By practice, it's damn hard to call it. HTBT.

I'd like to know why the PU thought it was his call.

Just as in basketball, not all contact is a foul.

Because it is.

It is anyone's call, but Tony - would you call it (as described in this particular OP) from 75 feet away if your partner was right on top of it and took a pass?

Don't know. Its hard to speculate. I have done it, however. On this particular one as described its way to HTBT to commit. That's the problem with describing plays in these forums. Recall, though, the OP told us that there was no beef from the offensive coach after the call. So, I might.

Interesting Situation: A question
 

Tony,

I am confused, under what set of mechanics does the PU have the ability to rule on INT at 2B when the PU has no responsibility at 1B for a play?

Yes, the PU has the FPSR violation if the PU has to follow the ball to 1B. That is obvious. But I am not understanding why the PU would overrule his partner on a play where BU has responsibility to make the call? If that is a new NCAA practice, great, I can sure fix a lot of calls my partner misses!

But if you and I are calling a game, I'm the BU and I don't call a FPSR on a force play at 2B when there is no play at 1B, and you do, we will have a post-game discussion, and certainly one right there.

jk, I was always told that the mechanics for INT are: wherever you are, if you see it, call it. That said, if I were PU and my BU were watching things unfold at 2B, staying with the play there because there was no play at 1B, I would hesitate before making an interference call.

If he didn't make the call, I would. Then time would be out, we'd get together to discuss it, and if he had info that would lead me to change my call I'd change it. But it's generally harder to huddle and ADD an interference call than it is to huddle and remove one (like the "call on the field" in football, maybe).

The D-coach might not like it when I change my call, but if I do change it I'll have a good reason to tell him. (He still won't like it, of course.)

CCA

I just dont see what all the hubbub is about..

Ya know....Sometimes Ya Just Gotta Umpire...
These kinds of calls are the ones you have to have the balls to make. Maybe F4 didnt throw because the runner came in standing up. I know its a HTBT , but I got INT. He didnt slide, made contact, and it appears, in my judgement he altered the play.

Which conversation would make more sense:

Def coach: " Uhh coach, I didnt have FPSR there, because in my opinion your fielder didnt have a shot at first. I know the runner didnt slide, I know he went in standing up, and I did have contact"...but

Or

Off Coach: " Skip, I got FPSR. He went in standing up and made contact, and in my judgement altered the play"....

See, everyone sees the same thing out there at the bag. Its what we see as umpires that counts. Off coach sees it as maybe incidental, or not enough there. Def coach see it as INT. I think its best to call here on the side that didnt do what they were supposed to.

Force-Play-Slide Rule
SECTION 4. The intent of the force-play-slide rule is to ensure the safety of all players. This is a safety as well as an interference rule. Whether the defense could have completed the double play has no bearing on the applicability of this rule. This rule pertains to a force-play situation at any base, regardless of the number of outs.


I have been guilty, on this forum, of taking the letter of the law to an extreme, either out of principle or to promote debate, so I know from whence you are coming.
In this case the letter of the law is insuffecient and leaves much to the judgement ofthe umpire to make a fair call. The mere presence of any contact in this situation should not be the only criteria.

IMO there is a big difference between saying "yes that is a FPSR violation but I'm overlooking it" and "no violation"

I'm pretty sure that was the point I was trying to make all along. You must know that in the NCAA FPSR the number of outs or whether a play can be made or not are not reason to say FSPR has not been committed. So knowing what you are passing on for the good of the game is important.

Msa
 

Cool. Did you have a play at 1B?