Interference supersedes obstruction?

[ronald]

Kellerumps,

I believe there is something somewhere that says interference supercedes obstruction. Given that catcher obstruction is a form a obstruction, then it seems that we would apply this rule or principle. And just as you say that you can't find anything in the ASA rule book about this play, you also have to admit that you can not find anything to justify catcher obstruction superceding or not ruling on the interference.


The reference to "interference ... unless ..." came out of the nation UIC conference and comes from the UIC who made the original call. Granted we were not there to hear the words but the UIC gave me the impression that he was a witness to those words. That appears to be the interpretation of ASA. All I can do is provide the best information I can.

Finally, I was not privy to the conversation when the original interference supercedes obstruction got into the rule book either in the rule section or POE. For all we know, they may have thought about this (CO/interference) but did not deem it important enough to clarify that (improbable probably). So, I believe, whether we agree, like it or not, we are left with one ruling to make until we get something different.

From my limited access to a seat at the big table, I'd say ASA has spoken. It will be applied that way in Greater DC area at least.