Send this guy back to school . . .
 

Last weekend, I stumbled upon an ASA 12u "B" level travel tournament that I had no connection with whatsoever, and witnessed the following:

Runner on 2B is stealing third. F2's rather blooping throw is to F5's left, so F5 moves to her left and a yard inside the 2B-3B line to try to glove the throw. The ball goes over her glove, past her, and hits the runner in the helmet as she slides into 3B. The ball bounces into the outfield, and coach directs the runner to run home.

The call? Runner out for interference.

When the coach wants to know why, the ump explains, "The rule was changed this year. Interference with a thrown ball doesn't have to be intentional."

At least he's getting outs. ;)

Back to school? He's correct! :(

Let me see....didn't someone on this board dutifully note that with this change stupid $hit like this would happen? Oh, yeah, it was me!

Sorry, where is the NUS & Supervisors so I can say, "I told you so!" :D

Okay, so this guy needs help, but he probably thinks he is right. We don't know what kind of direction he received in any type of clinic. This is the type of stuff that should have been covered at anything resembling a clinic or meeting. Unfortunately, some locals just give rule changes with little to no clarification.


Edited to add final comment.

12U B Travel Tourneys is school.

hopefully someone was paying attention and taught this guy..

but the UIC was probably off hiding somewhere waiting for a protest.

but the UIC was probably off hiding somewhere waiting for a protest.

I doubt that a UIC even existed for this tournament. I should have said "tournament played under ASA rules" rather than "ASA tournament." A common rule in these kind of tournaments is, "Umpire's decision is final. No protests."

I left soon after that play, and the score was 2-1 at the time, but I found out that the offended team ended up winning easily.

If you're serious, you better register for rules class along with that twerp.

Bob

Your not much on subtle humor, are you, Bob. Besides, his statement of the rule change WAS correct, even though his RULING was not.