Quote:
|
Quote:
Unfortunately, the rule only implies it, and doesn't state it outright. Here's one place: 12.19.1.4 Physical contact by the base runner with a fielder attempting to field a fair batted ball or a foul ball that might become fair shall be interference, provided the fielder had a reasonable chance to make a play and was prevented from doing so. The "and was prevented from doing so" certainly implies that we must wait to see if they are actually prevented. Also under effect: If the interference prevents the fielder from catching a routine fly ball, the batter is also out Again, the wording of "prevents the fielder from catching". It's not as clear as anyone would like - but with the clarifications at clinics, it's is clear what they want here. |
Quote:
Case plays on arbiter, from the NCAA rules editor, constantly use the phase that I highlighted: "interference is an immediate dead ball." It is even part of the rule: Quote:
Quote:
Please, please please have your clinicians send me their materials and/or videos. Because they are wrong. All of the clinics that I have attended (which include ones being hosted and presented by the SUP) have never made this distinction. |
Think what you wish, BS. I would ask you what the purpose of the rule I quoted might mean if the one you quoted is the only rule we should look at here.
But I don't have the energy right now for a semantic argument when I know what I've seen on about 10 different occasions. Call what you want... I hope your bosses like what you call. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
prevented from doing so. I agree that what you said and "provided the fielder had a reasonable chance to make a play" are equivalent. But if that is what the rulesmaker's intent was they would not have added, "and was prevented from doing so". |
Quote:
I used to play with a SS that dove for anything. I mean anything! 20' away when he hit the ground, but he dove for the ball. He was attempting to make a play, but he had no shot at doing so. If a runner was going from 2B to 3B and this guy dove for a ball up the middle that there was no chance to make a play and flew into that runner, I'm not calling INT. To me, that is how that rule reads. Granted, it may not be well written, but that is how this hi skuel gratiate reads it. |
similar sit this weekend, where F3 runs hard into the 1B coach while chasing a fly ball which just crosses the fence out of play (high fence; no chance of reaching over to make the catch).
If I call INT at the time of collision, I clearly have to reverse my call, no? (sorry, didn't realize this was a 5-year old thread) |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:43pm. |