Ball Hits the ondeck batter, Read on!!

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

To conclude that, you'd have to assume the poster was lying through his teeth.
Plus, the explanation from the ump for not calling INT was "he just scored." Totally irrelevant and wrong.

Let's agree on something else: that the original poster was telling the truth, and that the ODH got hit by the throw in fair territory, in front of the plate, and that the throw was on the money to retire a runner attempting to score.

Now what do you have?

I'm not assuming anything: on the contrary, I'm suspending belief about credibility here. Objectively, it seems much more likely that the throw was offline: that's far, far more common than offensive teammates going onto the field during play.

I've already agreed that this is a judgment call, and if the PU judges that the players were in fair territory it's an easy INT call. So I'm not sure what your point is there.

My point is to our colleagues on the forum: don't get talked into a bad INT call here by a coach who insists that offensive teammates may not be on the dirt circle. A bad throw into a crowd does not warrant INT.

As for the PU's explanation: sometimes in the heat of the moment we don't give the right answer. Took me a minute or two last weekend to come up with the expression, "malicious contact supersedes obstruction." His explanation was wrong, but understandable; and he might have another one today.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I've already agreed that this is a judgment call, and if the PU judges that the players were in fair territory it's an easy INT call.

That's all I needed to hear. If you said that before, I missed it.