mb..... help me out, not disagreeing with your reply, are you referencing 9.4.2?

Great point.....I thought the same thing when I was going through the whole how/why? thing in my mind yesterday. Went back and watched the replay again to see.

If the argument was about the run counting, I would think that the Hawaii HC would initially be in a discussion (as opposed to an argument) with the PU. Which probably would have led to the crew getting together.

But you raise a good point....based on reading lips in the video, I assumed he was arguing the no INF call.

The runner blatantly interfered. I have watched the play over and over in slow motion and the ball was up against the fielder's body and glove when the runner ran into her. Since when was the fielder required to play the ball with 100% accuracy in order to be protected? This isn't the case of a deflected ball bounced 5 feet away. The ball only "gets away" when the runner bashed into the 2nd baseman.

I am one of the bigger proponents of having more "no-call wrecks." However, to have a wreck, both parties must be doing what they are supposed to be doing. Running directly into a fielder fielding the ball is NOT what the offense should be doing. The offense is required to vacate the area needed by the defense to execute the play.

NCAA Rule 12.19.1.4.3: "It is still INTERFERENCE if a batted ball is misplayed and remains in front of the fielder such that the fielder still has an opportunity to make a play, and the base runner contacts the fielder. Exception: If the misplayed ball bounds away or past the fielder and then contact occurs as the fielder and base runner collide, this may be considered inadvertent contact, interference or obstruction.

INTERFERENCE WAS THE CORRECT CALL. IT WAS NOT CALLED.

Do we know that the umpire crew was at all involved or asked if the run scored? I can easily see the umpire crew addressing the ejection, apparent injury, and all that aftermath without anyone noticing that the scoreboard now shows an extra run.

And, is it the umpire crew's job to know? Or simply to answer the question if asked. I don't pay that much attention if I'm not looking at a run rule; I'm thinking the official scorer screwed up, and the Hawaii bench failed to question the score.

That's what I would like to believe happened. Unfortunately, if that was the case, because that would have turned it into a timing play with R2 rounding 3rd base and coming home to score, the plate umpire should have either pointed to the plate and said "count the run" or waved off the run.

I also know that we aren't score keepers, but we do have a responsibility to clarify when there is confusion. We have mechanics for that. And while we don't stare at scoreboards, someone (including the umpires) should have seen that the "1" turned into a "2" during the ESPN expanded media time between innings.

Ahhhhh....now I see your point.
Only took me four hours to understand what you were saying!!!

It always amazes me when umpires come on here who have never experienced calling at the speed this level of softball is happening and start to criticize others based on being able to watch video clips over and over again in slow motion.

Yes, I believe the umpire missed the interference, but he made a judgement call based on what was in front of him at the time and in the position he was at on the field. A judgement call, we all make them every day.

Instead of criticizing, and talking about how badly our fellow umpires missed calls when most of us have never seen plays develop at this speed, we should be using the information to figure out what we would do and what would be a better position to take so we can get a better look and possibly make a different judgement.

Thanks for letting me get this off my chest.

I really, really, REALLY hate to be the one to raise this point, but is there not a standard NCAA mechanic provided to inform each member of the crew that a run/no run scenario IS a possibility in this type of situation?

Should not the PU have immediately pointed at the plate and stated, "no run" or "no score" or something to that effect that would have eliminated all doubt?

Minor nit: The phantom run was the first scored by ND. Makes the runner INT in the 7th much more significant.

Yes there is.

And in addition to the PU immediately pointing to the plate and stating "no run" or "no score", as you pointed out, the Manual also instructs the PU to "watch the scoreboard to make sure a run is not recorded."

Again, as I said in a much earlier post..... there was a lot going on both during and after the play. Some focus was lost. It could happen to anyone of us, at a regional, National, or any big game in any tournament under any sanction. We can ALL learn something here.

You're welcome. I have called at the "speed this level of softball is happening." I did not come on to criticize the umpire. I usually find a way to support the umpire. My commentary was an application of the rule to the play, something almost no one else was doing. People post on this forum without bothering to open up the NCAA rule book. The NCAA rules are specific on this play. People bash the NCAA rule book for being too long and wordy, but it is specific and leave little doubt, the doubt that those who focus in other "codes" clearly brought to these posts.

I watched it in slow motion to see if I could find a way to support the umpire. I was hoping the ball went by or through the fielder. That just wasn't the case.

So we can learn this: 1) Know the rules you are to enforce, know them well and know what field you're on; 2) don't rush your calls; 3) when you might/are wrong, you better give the disagreeing coach a little more leeway; 4) when umpires get together, they ought to get the entire call correct; 5) it's better to get together and discuss the play before someone gets ejected; 6) proper plate mechanics signaling "count the run" or "no run" could be helpful in a case like this. 7) A fielder fielding a batted ball has protection under the interference rules until the fielder clearly demonstrates that she no longer has that protection - not the other way around; and 8) when a runner runs and a straight line and makes no effort to go behind or in front of a defender fielding a batted ball in the base line, there's a hell of a good chance there is interference if there is a collision and the runner, not the fielder, is the one who would have to convince the umpire otherwise.

Not for nothing and leaving aside your resume you like to share with us whenever you disagree with a newbie, but HAVE YOU EVER READ THE NCAA RULE BOOK OR MECHANICS MANUAL? :eek:

You have repeatedly made comments on posts pertaining to NCAA rules and mechanics and are so often incorrect. Then, when it is pointed out to you, you simply say something uneducated like, "The umpire's mechanics were clear in this case."

Used NCAA manuals and rule books don't have much resale value on the open market, so feel free to crack the spine and deflower yours.

For anyone who needs it, go HERE for an NCAA 2012-2013 Softball Rule Book.

Though you go through the steps of "purchasing" it, the download is free and only takes a minute or two.

I've had one sitting on my laptop for the past few years and it is a great and efficient resource.

This isn't a fall tournament. If he/she isn't up to it, maybe he/she shouldn't be in a group that is, presumably, the top 64 NCAA officials in the country.

There were some pretty badly kicked calls this weekend that were potential game changers. The one or possibly two in the 8th inning of the Michigan v. Louisville winners game on Saturday being probably the most egregious. And that's just in the 12 games that were nationally televised.

TV can be very revealing. I noticed ESPN isn't using K Zone this year.