The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sun Apr 15, 2018, 12:47pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 37
NFHS--Hypothetical no interference

NFHS--R1 on first, less than two outs. B2 hits ball to F4. R1 and F4 are really close together and the ball is deflected. FU calls R1 out for interference, B2 is safe at 1st. Offensive coach says it appeared that the ball was deflected by F4's glove, not R1. PU and FU confer. PU says the ball was, indeed, deflected by F4, not R1. Can this call be reversed? I understand this is not a true appeal.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sun Apr 15, 2018, 01:24pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredhjr View Post
NFHS--R1 on first, less than two outs. B2 hits ball to F4. R1 and F4 are really close together and the ball is deflected. FU calls R1 out for interference, B2 is safe at 1st. Offensive coach says it appeared that the ball was deflected by F4's glove, not R1. PU and FU confer. PU says the ball was, indeed, deflected by F4, not R1. Can this call be reversed? I understand this is not a true appeal.
The call can be changed by the calling umpire with better information or knowledge from a partner. Of course the other factor is whether the R1 proximity caused the deflection.

The difficulty would be deciding what to do with R1. You must decide whether R1 would be safe at 2nd or out if there was no INT call. Umpire jeopardy is based on judgment of what the mistake caused.
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT.
It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Sun Apr 15, 2018, 02:39pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Sherman, TX
Posts: 4,359
My problem here is why did the BU call INT unless he clearly saw something being done by R1 that would denote INT??
__________________
Scott


It's a small world, but I wouldn't want to have to paint it.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sun Apr 15, 2018, 04:19pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skahtboi View Post
My problem here is why did the BU call INT unless he clearly saw something being done by R1 that would denote INT??
Agreed. Brain cramp, assumption, anticipation. Any of those could come into play. Remember this was a hypothetical. After the inning the umpires discussed the play and how difficult it was to determine interference or not. Started them wondering--what if the wrong call was made? Could it be undone?
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon Apr 16, 2018, 09:14am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,450
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredhjr View Post
Agreed. Brain cramp, assumption, anticipation. Any of those could come into play. Remember this was a hypothetical. After the inning the umpires discussed the play and how difficult it was to determine interference or not. Started them wondering--what if the wrong call was made? Could it be undone?
Absolutely. To correct, R1 would be awarded 2B, BR to 1B
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon Apr 16, 2018, 02:14pm
Stirrer of the Pot
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Lowcountry, SC
Posts: 2,216
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredhjr View Post
NFHS--R1 on first, less than two outs. B2 hits ball to F4. R1 and F4 are really close together and the ball is deflected. FU calls R1 out for interference, B2 is safe at 1st. Offensive coach says it appeared that the ball was deflected by F4's glove, not R1. PU and FU confer. PU says the ball was, indeed, deflected by F4, not R1. Can this call be reversed? I understand this is not a true appeal.
Don't get hung up on something needing an "appeal". This is nothing more than the coach asking the calling umpire to check with his/her partner because he/she may have missed something vital during the play. The coach is allowed to do that.
__________________
"Let's face it. Umpiring is not an easy or happy way to make a living. In the abuse they suffer, and the pay they get for it, you see an imbalance that can only be explained by their need to stay close to a game they can't resist." -- Bob Uecker
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

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
Basket Interference - NFHS vs. NBA Freddy Basketball 1 Tue Dec 29, 2015 05:09pm
NFHS Batter interference rbmartin Baseball 12 Tue Mar 20, 2012 08:06am
Interference (NFHS) Dholloway1962 Softball 35 Thu Sep 11, 2008 12:06pm
NFHS interference bkbjones Softball 7 Wed Mar 19, 2008 12:51pm
NFHS - Pass interference mikesears Football 7 Fri Sep 22, 2000 12:26am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:59am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1