Interference or not?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by Kevzebra


I just hope I never see you on the field. the runner has to avoid contact with the fielder if possible. Just because they are going to be tagged out dosen't give them the right to bowl over the defense. It was so clear she wanted to prevent the runner being tagged out at home. Probably why I got dumped for arguing the call into the next inning (well, telling the ump he missed the call).

[Edited by Kevzebra on Apr 9th, 2004 at 02:58 PM]

First, you did not specify the sanctioning body and I responded in a general manner.

Two, at no point did you state the runner "bowled over" anyone. You stated the fielder was "run into" by the runner. To me, big difference.

Three, I'll stand by my original ruling under any sanctioning body. The runner does NOT have the absolute responsbility to avoid a defender unless they are attempting to field a batted ball. There is NO rule which requires a runner to cede just because a fielder has the ball. Don't come back and tell me about collisions because that isn't what is addressed by that statement. If you insist intent isn't necesssary to draw INT in this situation, fielders will be coached to jump in front of an oncoming runner and fall to the ground.

Now, to the collision part. If the umpire judges the runner could have avoided the fielder, but attempted to run through them, that is intentional and INT. If they could have avoided the fielder and just chose not to is also interference.

However, you just cannot a runner to stop on a dime and disappear just because they were put out on the tag. If the fielder jumped in front of the advancing runner and it is obvious the runner was doing no more than what they are suppose to do in running to 1B, than it is nothing more than a D.M.F.

BTW, if you wouldn't want to see me on the field, that's your loss, not mine.