|
Thu Apr 19, 2012, 07:00am
|
|||
|
|||
|
The batter was 10 feet up the line to get out of the way of the play. That should be pretty obvious. Rather than standing near the plate wondering whether she would be interfering, actively interfering or intentionally interfering. She bailed out like more batters should do.
In order to have interference, there needs to be a hinderance of the offense of a defensive player attempting to execute a play. It is a rule of equity intended to make right what was wrong. If there was no possibility of a play (your judgment), then there would be no interference (assuming you did see the player kick the ball).
__________________
Kill the Clones. Let God sort them out. No one likes an OOJ (Over-officious jerk). Realistic officiating does the sport good. 
|
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Threaded Mode
