No "Intent" in interference

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Attended a clinic this past weekend and when the discussion came to the rule changes and interference, the words 'intent', 'intentional', and 'intentionality' (hey, not my word) were used more the the term 'interference' was used.

This supports my concern of the changes. The moment an umpire uses any word which insinuates "intent", the coach is going to scream and holler that the umpire must be wrong because that was removed from the rule.

I think UICs may be called to the field a bit more often this season.

BTW, the clinicians were of the national staff.

I also attended a national staff rules clinic this past weekend. This one caused the most stir of course and will surely cause the most trouble this year.

The way it was explained was to essentially "allow the umpires to determine INT instead getting into the players mind to determine intent".

I believe "intent" to be an escape for an Umpire.. not something holding me back. They removed our escape valve for an INT.

Its much easier to claim "I didnt believe there was Intent" than it is to claim "I dont believe there was interference".

It was a decent clinic though and one things for sure.. cant wait for it all to start up again.