Time for ya'll to teach me something Part 2:

[BaBa Booey]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

You didn't answer Bopb's question:

Play: R2 only, steal attempt.

Batter clearly interfers with F2 attempt -- if fact he interferes so badly that F2 stops.

Are you saying that JEAPU would let the play stand? That a throw is necessary for there to be interference? (I agree that there needs to be an *attempt* to throw, and it's easier to sell the interference if there is a throw.)

_____

Forget a second throw. A poster who made it appear it was an academey student has led us to believe that one cannot call interference without a throw. That is not my recollection of Jimmy's or Sarge's position.

My mistake on the R2 only question. There does not need to be a throw (as far as I can recall), but there should be and effort to make a throw. Then if the throw is not made because of an obvious act by the batter, enforce the interference.

It is possible that they have changed their position on this, but that is how I remember it.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BaBa Booey

My mistake on the R2 only question. There does not need to be a throw (as far as I can recall), but there should be and effort to make a throw. Then if the throw is not made because of an obvious act by the batter, enforce the interference.

It is possible that they have changed their position on this, but that is how I remember it.

Thanks for all the update.

I accept what you are saying, but I think the interpretation is inconsistent. If my play (R2 only) is interference, then I think the interference also happens in the OP at the same time and that "throw" was not successful so the "throw" to retire R1 "never happened." I think (or, more accurately thought) that JEAPU's interp is too literal on the word "throw."

[BaBa Booey]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Thanks for all the update.

I accept what you are saying, but I think the interpretation is inconsistent. If my play (R2 only) is interference, then I think the interference also happens in the OP at the same time and that "throw" was not successful so the "throw" to retire R1 "never happened." I think (or, more accurately thought) that JEAPU's interp is too literal on the word "throw."

I think it is certainly a topic that is open for debate.

Bottom line is I had to enforce it the way PBUC wanted me to, and that was the interpretation they went with.