fpsr

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Big Slick

staying in the base path CAN be a form of int and also can NOT be a form of int.

Staying on one's running route to a base should, in itself, never be an act of INT. Doing something different could be.

USA's interp from 2007 or 2009 NUIC clinic offered a sample play were simply being hit while running to 2B was not INT. Their counter-example was a just retired runner falling to the ground and getting back up and getting hit by the throw was as that was an act independent of simply attempting to advance.

It is the same philosophy for a batter interfering with a catcher's throw to 3B. If the batter stays where s/he belongs it is not INT if hit be a throw from the C. This had been, and still is, the philosophy for decades. If the batter is restricted to that certain spot, the catcher knows where s/he needs to make the throw. Why in the world would the same philosophy not apply on the base paths?

Have NCAA & NFHS deemed these players and coaches simply not smart enough to understand something so logical my dog can understand it?