The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 02, 2017, 04:19pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Woodstock, GA; Atlanta area
Posts: 2,822
I'm not sure we have enough information to be definitive. There is deflected, and there is deflected.

In the past, those charged with case play interpretations indicated that if the ball remained adjacent to a player fielding the ball, that it could be considering still in the act of fielding. The case play referenced above is specific to the ball rolling behind the fielder. The interpretation by MB and HP was similar/identical to NFHS (well, because NFHS used the MB/HP interpretation).

Later, NFHS felt the need to define an "initial play", and to include the verbiage "within a step and a reach". ASA declined to follow and would not adopt what was considered a "baseball" definition, but indicated they only differed with "in any direction", believing that a ball proximately in front or to the side could be considered still part of the fielding action, while a ball behind was no longer in the initial action. We were directed to use judgment if the ball was still being fielded, not to consider the "one bite of the apple" approach, nor any one specific distance as too far.

I recall HP using the "one bite of the apple" example to ask if F6 was fielding a bounding ball which rolled around in the glove if the runner could then be accountable for "accidental" contact, be protected from interference and awarded obstruction? When participants eventually agreed that would be interference, he then asked if the ball popped out 1"; then 1 foot, then immediately in front of F6. The purpose of the "drill" was to enable the listeners to realize that this issue is similar to art versus porn; difficult to almost impossible to define, but you should know it when you see it.

To the OP; maybe legit, maybe wrong. But we weren't there, and this is judgment.

Andy; unless something specific to a BR rule contradicts, I have always believed you should treat as a subset of runner. There can be no logical basis for treating the play 2' in front of 1st base differently than one 2' after by the same player on the same live play.
__________________
Steve
ASA/ISF/NCAA/NFHS/PGF
Reply With Quote
 

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Umpire Interference / Batter Interference bob jenkins Baseball 17 Mon Feb 06, 2012 09:57pm
batters interference/interference by teammate _Bruno_ Baseball 7 Mon Apr 07, 2008 07:28am
Runner interference versus umpire interference Jay R Baseball 1 Thu Apr 28, 2005 07:00pm
interference... jesmael Baseball 4 Mon May 24, 2004 09:51am
Interference? JRSooner Baseball 3 Fri Apr 09, 2004 11:11am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:46pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1