The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball

View Poll Results: Did ASA luck out. Was that interference in your opinion?
Yes 10 41.67%
No 14 58.33%
Voters: 24. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 26, 2011, 11:31pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 257
ASU v. Texas

Was that interference in your opinion?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2011, 07:34am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 318
Not by rule.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2011, 07:49am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 109
I had INT all the way.

ESPN3 video Go to 2:23:30

Youtube video recorded from Iphone

Watch for when the TAMU coach approaches the umpire. From my limited lip reading it looks like he says something about "contact for that call" because the TAMU coach then asks her player about contact.

Last edited by txump81; Fri May 27, 2011 at 07:54am.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2011, 07:53am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 1,640
Video from the NCAA website...good replay at about the 1:20 mark.

Video - 52611_ASU_TAM - NCAA.com
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2011, 07:58am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 109
The TH gives R2 credit for avoiding contact implying that is the reason for no INT.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2011, 08:09am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
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.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2011, 08:33am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 318
So I ask all those who have INT:

Based on what NCAA rule?
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2011, 08:47am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,340
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.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2011, 08:48am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 109
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.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2011, 08:54am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 318
Quote:
Originally Posted by txump81 View Post
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.

Last edited by topper; Fri May 27, 2011 at 08:54am. Reason: missing 't'
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2011, 09:16am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Live Free or Die Country
Posts: 175
Send a message via Yahoo to 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
__________________
Wade Ireland
Softball Umpire
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2011, 09:23am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by CelticNHBlue View Post
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??

Quote:
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?

Last edited by Snocatzdad; Fri May 27, 2011 at 09:25am.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2011, 10:13am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Sherman, TX
Posts: 4,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by txump81 View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by topper View Post
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.
__________________
Scott


It's a small world, but I wouldn't want to have to paint it.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2011, 10:40am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skahtboi View Post
Going by 12.19, this could be interference.
What part of 12.19 leads you to believe this could be INT?
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 27, 2011, 10:40am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1
2010 and 2011 NCAA SOFTBALL RULES AND INTERPRETATIONS

12.19.1.4.2 Merely running in front of the fielder or jumping over the
ball while proceeding to the next base is not interference, even
though it may be distracting to the fielder or screen her view of the
ball. The runner may not at any time unnecessarily wave her arms
or verbally distract the fielder.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

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
Texas - Texas A&M Skahtboi Softball 32 Sun Aug 21, 2011 06:45am
Texas T dragonref Basketball 15 Mon Mar 29, 2004 09:01am
Texas vs Texas Tech Play carldog Basketball 7 Tue Jan 27, 2004 04:56pm
Texas/Texas Tech officials johnSandlin Basketball 4 Wed Jan 16, 2002 01:05am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:26am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1