Your call??

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by Matt

This AR actually supports a call of obstruction more than interference in this case. The only time a fielder is protected under the plain language of it is during the initial misplay and if he's actually in the motion of picking up the ball. This AR supports a call of interference only if the act of fielding simply means the fielder has come within a step and a reach of the ball.

I'm a little confused. The AR I posted really does not have relevance to the OP other than that I believe NCAA leans toward protecting the fielder. I have seen MLB plays where the pitcher pulls up to avoid getting trucked and no call was made. That's their rules. In this case, I think NCAA wants to protect the fielder and avoid what happened next. We will see what they think. In any case if you think it was obstruction the crew had no call. I'm not good enough to think I would have thought quick enough to get it right in that sit.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by umpjim

I'm a little confused. The AR I posted really does not have relevance to the OP other than that I believe NCAA leans toward protecting the fielder. I have seen MLB plays where the pitcher pulls up to avoid getting trucked and no call was made. That's their rules. In this case, I think NCAA wants to protect the fielder and avoid what happened next. We will see what they think. In any case if you think it was obstruction the crew had no call. I'm not good enough to think I would have thought quick enough to get it right in that sit.

No, I think it was interference, and that the AR you cite isn't relevant at all. What I am saying is if someone wants to use the AR as dicta for this play, that it only covers the fielder at the start and end of the situation, narrowly tailoring his protection. Given that the fielder was contacted while in a futile tag attempt not in possession of the ball, this AR would not protect him: he's not in the initial misplay and he's not bending over to pick up the ball.