Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA (Post 843913)

I would think it would be more along the line of ability ot effort.

Originally Posted by mbcrowder (Post 843900)

I do understand that, and would rule 2 outs as well, despite the fact that this rule is in the wrong place.

But I've been saying for at least 2 years now that the way they wrote the rule is NOT what they mean (and not what we call!). The way they wrote it, taken literally, means we cannot call 2 outs if the fielder actually manages to catch the ball. Which is rather stupid as it would penalize the defense for making the catch (and reward them for not making it).

I know what the "right" ruling is... it's just not what the book says it is anymore.

Originally Posted by Crabby_Bob (Post 843906)

As it's written, "routine" modifies "fly ball", not "catch"

Originally Posted by Big Slick (Post 843981)

I agree that the wording is screwy, however, think of it this way: once there is interference, the ball is dead, and it is inconsequential if the ball ends up in the fielders glove. Technically the fielder can't catch it (the ball is dead), and thus she is prevented in doing so.