The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Softball (https://forum.officiating.com/softball/)
-   -   MAKE THE CALL (https://forum.officiating.com/softball/2991-b-make-call-b.html)

whiskers_ump Sun Sep 30, 2001 09:38pm

Make the Call
 
ASA Fastpitch--

R1 on 1B, BR hits towering fly to medium RF, F9 catches
ball when it finally comes down. BR has <i>wheels</i> and
has rounded first passing R1. F9 sees advancing BR going
in towards 2b, F9 fires ball to F6, however, ball is over
her head and into left field foul territory. (BR has now
circled to the RF area and is retreating to her dugout). R1
moving towards 2nd on overthrown ball. Interference was
called on BR. Correct call?

glen

oppool Sun Sep 30, 2001 10:02pm

My opinion bad call should of been a no call either way I see it F9 throw in should be into 2nd anyway


Jmho

Don

[Edited by oppool on Sep 30th, 2001 at 10:05 PM]

IRISHMAFIA Mon Oct 01, 2001 06:48am

That goes either way depending on how the umpire viewed the play.

Yes, interference could be called based on a retired player drawing a throw. However, the BR is allowed to run-out their play on a batted ball. On the other hand, she should have been aware there was a runner on 1B and that she is not permitted to pass her and should have either pulled up at the base or ran through it.

BTW, FP has nothing to do with this d:-)

HTBT,


Dakota Mon Oct 01, 2001 09:34am

Is intent required?
 
Would a runner who was so ignorant of the situation to have passed a runner in front of her suddenly become aware that she was out, and would continue to run with the intent of drawing a throw? Unlikley.

So, for the sake of argument, say she was not running with intent to draw a throw. Does this matter?

ASA 8-8-P says, in part, <font color="blue">When, after being declared out or scoring, a runner <u>intentionally</u> interferes with a defensive player's opportunity to make a play on another runner... A runner continuing to run and drawing a throw <u>may be considered</u> a form of interference.</font>

Interesting wording. The notion of "intent" is not repeated in the statement about drawing a throw -- only that it happens -- but the statement uses the phrase <u>may be considered</u>, not <u>is</u> a form of interference.

If it MAY be, then there are times when it MAY NOT be.

Is judging intent the deciding factor?

bluezebra Mon Oct 01, 2001 04:04pm

F9 made the catch and should have known the batter was out. Did the umpire call and signal "OUT"?

Bob

IRISHMAFIA Mon Oct 01, 2001 07:05pm

Bob,

F9 may have had something else to watch than which of the players in identical uniforms was the runner and which was the BR.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:24am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1