Texas - ASU game 3

[Durham]

Tony, let me see if I can share with you my understanding of the rules that you are asking about. I'll start by saying that I am not talking about the play, because I wasn't there and I don't know what the rulings or judgments were.

I'll start with the definition of interference.

Interference
SECTION 50. The act of an offensive player, umpire or nongame person who
interferes with; physically or verbally hinders; confuses; or impedes any fielder
attempting to make a play.

Now you were asking about when the batter becomes the BR. It is my understanding that he becomes the BR when the umpire calls ball 4. Now as umpires I believe that it is our first priority to judge the pitch. So in most causes we will make ball or strike known right away. Now if it is a 3-2 count and the batter takes off for first before we make our judgment known, one of two things usually will happen, we will call it a strike and the batter could be in jepordary of having unintentional BI called against him. It is my understanding that if we rule ball 4, then the BR that is moving towards first would be called for interference if he committed an intentional act that we ruled interference. However, the BR moving toward first that might unintentional hinder a throw in my mind at least would be like a train wreck situation, where as long as he is doing what he is suppose to do, going to first, I do not believe that by rule he could be guilty of unintentional interference.

Interference is a judgment call and intentional acts are always judgment, but to have unintentional interference be possible, in my mind at least, a member of the offense my hinder a legitimate attempt to retire a runner. And I do not believe that common sense and fair play dictate that a runner moving forward to an awarded base can be guilty of unintentional interference or a legitimate play can be made on a runner moving up on an award.

Some here say the rule book is confusing or lacks clarity and I do not believe that that is the case, but I also believe that the NCAA will let us all know in Jan what they think about the statement I just made.

As far as the play in question, I can find rules and justification to support the ruling on the field, but as to what happened, none of us knows and I am ok with that. I think that the discussion that has come up based on this play is awesome in the growth of all of us and I hope that one day when we are talking about one of my plays we remember that.

And for the record, I kicked a play at first in my regional. Glad my crew was there to help me out and glad I was able to learn from the experience.