The Official Forum  

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

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jun 30, 2008, 09:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sierra Nevada Mtns
Posts: 3,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by reccer
I readily agree F4 was attempting to field a deflected batted ball and that she had an opportunity to make an out. Therefore, F4 is not guilty of obstruction

BU readily agrees that there was no intentional interference on the part of R1.

Since BU agrees no intentional interference, according to the rule (not the supplement) train wreck and play on.
You got the rule wrong.. intent is not the issue here.

Your bolded statement is the answer.

That is interference.

You cant just disregard the rules supplement willy nilly. It is put there as a supplement for a reason.
__________________
ASA, NCAA, NFHS

Last edited by wadeintothem; Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 09:32pm.
Reply With Quote
 

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
Deflected ball and interference WestMichBlue Softball 10 Tue Oct 18, 2005 06:33pm
Ball lodged in glove: FED interpretation Carl Childress Baseball 67 Tue Oct 12, 2004 07:24am
Runner hit by batted, deflected ball Bluefoot Softball 8 Sun Jun 20, 2004 04:18pm
Runner hit by batted ball after deflected by pitcher tiny Baseball 6 Tue Mar 02, 2004 11:24am
Ball deflected out of play Duke Softball 2 Sat May 10, 2003 05:47am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:58am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1