INT on a DP?

[chymechowder]

Originally Posted by steveshane67

What about the BU's explanation (also supported by the PU-I told you the ASA umps in boston are bad) that the fielder has to physically throw the ball for INT to be called?

The fielder actually throwing the ball shouldn't be a necessary requirement for INT, in my opinion. What if the runner jumps up in the air, facing the infielder (I've seen a nutjob do this), and the fielder holds the ball b/c his instinct is NOT to fire the ball into someone's face?

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by chymechowder

The fielder actually throwing the ball shouldn't be a necessary requirement for INT, in my opinion. What if the runner jumps up in the air, facing the infielder (I've seen a nutjob do this), and the fielder holds the ball b/c his instinct is NOT to fire the ball into someone's face?

Or what if the retired runner decides to bowl over F4? Where's the throw, blue?

[Dakota]

The kernel of truth in the "must attempt a throw" is that there must be a play for there to be interference. A fielder holding a throw because there is no shot at the out is not interference, regardless of where the runner is. The judgment comes from determining if the runner committed an act of interference (with a play).