The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Fri Aug 12, 2011, 03:35am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Gulf Coast of TX to Destin Fl
Posts: 988
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve View Post
I appreciate you asking, although I am pretty sure I am not one of those Rachel referred to. But I was at the same place, albeit not part of this discussion. I would guess the ones Rachel is referring to comes from the following Colorado Fireworks list: Emily A, Donna V, Willie N, Smokey E, Steve A, Kevin D, Dave N. Pretty great list, and I enjoyed listening to them on any number of topics.

I am going to disagree with something Andy said, and that, to me, is the key point. If we can say that a position behind the line between two defensive players is "behind" when relating to umpire interference, then that precedent has to also relate to runner interference. Behind is behind, not behind is not behind; there can't (shouldn't) be different interpretations based on who/what you are!!

And I agree with Rachel when she goes back to the intent of the rule (and definition of interference) that someone be disadvantaged for there to be a call. That is the basic difference with baseball; in baseball, if the ball contacts a runner, it is always interference, NO MATTER WHERE the defense is playing, in softball, it is meant to only be inteference if the contact stops the defense from making an apparent play. I know calling interference always is the easiest call to sell on this play (because of baseball); but it isn't always the right call in softball.

Still missed out on the conversation Rachel references; but would have loved to have been a fly on that wall.
Thank you Steve for your input. I am looking at this like a BR interference on a DK3.......ASA allows for the batter to unintentionlly interfere where NFHS has no such language......you either contacted the ball or you didn't.

As noted.......I could argue on either side of this one.......but my personal opinion is that in Rachel's OP......it is interference.

Never made it up to the Firecracker.....although an umpire buddy (and my mechanic) has been several times as a coach.....never had anything but good things to say (other than logistics).......

Thanks again for your input....

Joel
Reply With Quote
 

Bookmarks


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
Fielder carries ball out of play bossman72 Baseball 11 Thu Jul 26, 2007 02:08am
Fielder loses possession; Ball out of play Lapopez Baseball 37 Fri Aug 12, 2005 04:49pm
Interference with Fielder - Batted Ball Blue37 Baseball 6 Tue Mar 08, 2005 10:48am
batter interference with ball thrown by fielder Ernie Marshall Baseball 5 Tue Apr 23, 2002 07:37am
T/F - A fielder in possession of the ball can never be guilty of obstruction. Dakota Softball 2 Thu Oct 11, 2001 07:13pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:11pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1