Did the rule book editors forget this one?

[wadeintothem]

I dont mind if she flattens the fielder, but she has to hit the dirt to do it. There was actually a great play at 2nd base in the College Championship where the runner did just that - took out F4 (maybe F6@2B) causing bad throw at 1B... but runner was sliding. Considering Mike's opinion above, I definately dont understand his ruling on the call in question.

1st Post of the scenario

OK, here is a tougher OBS/INT sitch (to go along with the new wording):

Player going first to third.

Ball gets to the bag, 3B waiting.

As the runner is just about to crash into the 3B, who is about a foot in front of the base, ball glances off 3B's glove.

Collision ensues (almost immediately), 3B to the ground, ball obviously out.

Is this a no call? INT on the runner? OBS? The runner DID affect the fielder's ability to catch.

The fielder WAS blocking the bag. The runner did not slide or avoid (but did she have to?). AND the fielder never had possession.

Thanks

To which I call INT
He provides this info

That is what I had (the INT call).

But in retrosepct, I realized the fielder did not have the ball. It had already dropped, albeit partially due to the runner standing up.

If the drop preceded the contact........

Mike calls it OBS or USC.
I thought the justification for mikes call was that he may agree this was a misworded rule - but since he agrees with/applies the rule I dont see how he can disregard it when a runner crashes into a fielder in the act of fielding causing her to drop the ball but doesnt slide.

For the record, I wholeheartedly agree with this INT rule and have enforced it a few times this year. If it's an oversight, the only way I would stop enforcing it as it's written is to have ASA put out a clarification. I dont believe in running over catchers/fielders without sliding. Not in amateur and especially youth ball for sure.

[Edited by wadeintothem on May 28th, 2004 at 12:04 PM]