ASU v. Texas

[MD Longhorn]

First off, as a Texas grad... TAMU is NOT Texas. It's Texas A&M - the University of Texas's largest or 2nd largest rival.

As much as I hate to say it - as I despise the Aggies... that was definitely interference.

[topper]

So I ask all those who have INT:

Based on what NCAA rule?

[RKBUmp]

From the center field camera replay, it looks like there very well may have been contact with the fielders glove with her right knee. Also, by the NCAA rule, she can run in front of the fielder or jump over the ball. The runner stopped directly in front of the fielder, looks to have possibly made contact with her glove, then jumps the ball and continues to run.

[txump81]

12.9.7
The base runner is out:
When she interferes with a fielder attempting to field a batted ball...

I also agree with RKB. The runner stopped in front of F6 then took off.

[topper]

Originally Posted by txump81

12.9.7
The base runner is out:
When she interferes with a fielder attempting to field a batted ball...

I also agree with RKB. The runner stopped in front of F6 then took off.

I'm afraid that's not good enough. You'll need to cite the INT rule for 12.9.7 to work here.

[CelticNHBlue]

I have no INT:

1 - runner appears to be aware of the SS and (IMO) is attempting to avoid her and the ball (apparently successfully), she is not intentionally stopping to hinder the SSs view of the ball

2 - SS plays the ball timidly and not aggressively, IMO she elected to play the ball at a location that took her behind the runners path (as opposed to charging through the runners path), because of this the runner did not impact the ability of the fielder to play the ball

[Snocatzdad]

Originally Posted by CelticNHBlue

I have no INT:

1 - runner appears to be aware of the SS and (IMO) is attempting to avoid her and the ball (apparently successfully), she is not intentionally stopping to hinder the SSs view of the ball

Does NCAA take into account intent or just the fact that she is hindering her view of the ball??

2 - SS plays the ball timidly and not aggressively, IMO she elected to play the ball at a location that took her behind the runners path (as opposed to charging through the runners path), because of this the runner did not impact the ability of the fielder to play the ball

So penalize the SS for avoiding a collision caused by the baserunner being where she wants to go. Is there a "two for flinching" (in this case 2 runs) rule in NCAA ball?

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by txump81

12.9.7
The base runner is out:
When she interferes with a fielder attempting to field a batted ball...

I also agree with RKB. The runner stopped in front of F6 then took off.

Originally Posted by topper

I'm afraid that's not good enough. You'll need to cite the INT rule for 12.9.7 to work here.

Going by 12.19, this could be interference. Of course, it all comes down to the judgment of the umpires on the field. The ball appeared to be playable, and it could easily be argued that the runner denied the defender the opportunity to make a play on the ball. But, it can also be argued that the fielder just muffed what should have been a routine play. Apparently, that is how the umpires working the game felt.

[topper]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

12-9-7 ... if she'd not intentionally stopped in front of the fielder, I have nothing... it was the stop (or intentional slow down at minimum) that leads me to calling INT here. .

Just to save me from typing it again:

Originally Posted by topper

I'm afraid that's not good enough. You'll need to cite the INT rule for 12.9.7 to work here.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by topper

Just to save me from typing it again:

I know you have more experience than me with this rule-set. Maybe instead of just saying we're wrong you can explain why. It appears to me that this runner was not "merely running in front of the fielder", but rather slowed intentionally to make the play more difficult. I see the other side of it, and realize it's judgement - but if the umpire on the spot agreed with me ... would it still not be interference?

[txump81]

I'll paraphrase 12.19.1.4.2...

Merely running in front of the fielder or jumping the ball is not interference.

It is the stop in front if the fielder that gets the INT in my judgement.

[topper]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I know you have more experience than me with this rule-set. Maybe instead of just saying we're wrong you can explain why. It appears to me that this runner was not "merely running in front of the fielder", but rather slowed intentionally to make the play more difficult. I see the other side of it, and realize it's judgement - but if the umpire on the spot agreed with me ... would it still not be interference?

The runner is required to avoid the runner and being hit by the ball. If in doing this, which is what I saw last night, she slows down and blocks the view of the fielder, so be it. The book doesn't say how fast a runner must be going when passing in front of the fielder.

This was a case of the ss needing to move to the ball regardless of the runner so that the runner can't avoid her or she simply makes the play. If she does that, it would be A&M up 1-0.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by topper

So I ask all those who have INT:

Based on what NCAA rule?

12-9-7 ... if she'd not intentionally stopped in front of the fielder, I have nothing... it was the stop (or intentional slow down at minimum) that leads me to calling INT here.

[Gulf Coast Blue]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

First off, as a Texas grad... TAMU is NOT Texas. It's Texas A&M - the University of Texas's largest or 2nd largest rival.

As much as I hate to say it - as I despise the Aggies... that was definitely interference.

Thank you Mike.....as a UT alum also.......I was a little dismayed seeing that this thread was about the Aggies instead of the Lady Longhorns........d;-)

As much as I hate the aggies........I usually don't allow it to go into the womens sports........

That being said........I did have a tough time rooting for the lady Gators today......I usually despise the Florida sports teams.........but, again.......I tried to not allow my prejudice to flow into the womens' team sports. (Sorry to Wade and Hugo)

I coached a pitcher that played for the Ducks a few years back.......I think it was the first team from there that that had ever been to the Regionals.......she was a little **** (actually about 6'2"....so she wasn't little, but still a ****).....so I cried no tears when they did not make it to the Super Regionals.......

One of my other girls is playing for Kentucky this year........she will not play as a Freshman, but just getting there is an honor.

Joel

[Scooby]

I looked at this pay and I just do not see INT.