The Official Forum  

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 18, 2006, 11:42pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 143
I am just trying to clarify if the rule means what it says (that coach interference with a batted or thrown ball must be intentional for the runner to be out, but that any coach interference with a play on a runner results in the runner being out) or if it was intended to mean that intentional coach interference with a batted or thrown ball or a play on the runner results in the runner being called out but unintentional interference in any of those cases does not.

My example was not very good, so I will simply stick with the question.
__________________
Matt
Not an official,
just a full-time dad,
part-time coach,
here to learn.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 22, 2006, 05:00pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by IamMatt
I am just trying to clarify if the rule means what it says (that coach interference with a batted or thrown ball must be intentional for the runner to be out, but that any coach interference with a play on a runner results in the runner being out) or if it was intended to mean that intentional coach interference with a batted or thrown ball or a play on the runner results in the runner being called out but unintentional interference in any of those cases does not.
Okay, let's break it down:

First point

"When a coach intentionally interferes with a batted or thrown ball",

"OR"

Second point

"interferes with the defensive team's opportunity to make a play on another runner".

Clarification

"A batted or thrown ball that unintentionally hits a base coach is not considered interference".

I don't see any glaring grammatical shortcomings and the punctuation pretty much breaks the first sentence down to two distinctive independent scenarios connected by the disjunction "or".
__________________
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
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 22, 2006, 06:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sierra Nevada Mtns
Posts: 3,220
Ah, now I understand!


If you intentionally hit a coach with a ball, thats interference.

__________________
ASA, NCAA, NFHS
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 23, 2006, 07:40am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by wadeintothem
Ah, now I understand!


If you intentionally hit a coach with a ball, thats interference.

Actually, I would not put that by some people to coach. "Just try to hit the coach with the ball" could become a defensive strategy if the rule did not require intent.

Don't think that is so far fetched as we all know there are coaches who tell their catchers to just nail the BR in the back and look for the call.
__________________
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
Reply

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
Ball hits 1st base coach on rebound from fence illiniwek8 Baseball 2 Sat Apr 02, 2005 08:52pm
Ball strikes runner Lilblue612 Baseball 10 Thu Jun 13, 2002 08:44am
ball strikes runner after it passes an infielder jcor Baseball 6 Mon Jul 16, 2001 11:29pm
Base coach ASA oppool Softball 6 Sat Feb 17, 2001 08:37am
Coach Stupid strikes again! Mark Padgett Basketball 29 Thu Feb 01, 2001 09:53am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:17am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1