Mike,

I agree that one has to be very careful. The coach in my instance was definitely trying to get the players to throw to a base that runners were not at or advancing to.

Roland,

First of all, you could call interference even if a fielder did not throw to an erroneous base, if you judged that a runner was safe at another base becuse the fielder hesitated due to the coach's comments.

Secondly, the coach would get a stern verbal warning from me that he was treading awfully close to the USC line. That said, if he did it again, he'd be gone.

SamC

My final thoughts
 

A consensus opinion of this board is that as long as F6 does not have to alter her path to her fielding position you will not call interference on the runner. I appreciate your opinions and I am going to consider changing my rulings in this area when spring opens up.

Still - it is hard for me to give up! I would never call this in baseball, for F6 is well beyond the basepath and has plenty of time to regain sight of the ball. And with the runner getting a good lead, he is usually past F6 before the ball gets there.

But softball lends itself frequently to the possibility of the runner, fielder, and ball all being at the same point at the same time. When a fielder has her eye on the ball; when the ball suddenly disappears as a runner passes by; when the ball reappears right on top of the fielder and she can not react to it - I have a problem saying "too bad, breaks of the game." When a collision almost occurs and the fielder flinches, protecting herself, and misses the ball I have a problem with suggestions that the fielder has to have nerves of steel, or that she must be less than a quality athlete and we are not going to help her. Sure, an outstanding athlete may well quickly adjust to the ball and still make a play. But are we not going to apply all the rules to a an average, or poor athlete as some posters have suggested here. In the games that I call I do not see a Division 1 candidate on every team. When I do see one, there is a huge disparity in talent between her and the bottom of the team. Maybe my view of the game is prejudiced towards the average player. I don't do ASA summer ball so I do not see the high level traveling teams with a HS all-conference at every position. Even so, there must still be a large skill drop from the super player to the 9th or 10th player on the roster.

It also seems that many of you - and many other umpires that I've talked with - have to see "intent" or contact to call interference. But the rules just don't support that view. The rules say "intentional or unintentional," "physical or verbal or . . . ."

My two cents - and thanks for allowing me the soapbox.
WMB

My Final rebuttal to WMB's position.
 

IMO, it is unfair to require a runner to ait until the ball has passed in front of her before proceeding to the next base, just because the fielder chose to setup to field the ball behind the baseline. Now if the fielder is charging the ball and flinches because of the runner, then I would call interference, but if the fielder bobbles the ball because she chose to wait for the ball to get to her and lost sight of it as the runner went by, then I would not call interference in that case.

SamC