U3K and Interference

[teebob21]

It might not be the "right" way to judge this, but I mentally approach U3K+INT as the following:

1. Did the BR move in a way judged to intentionally contact the ball?
2a. Before contact, did any defender have an opportunity to make a play on the ball?
2b. Did the BR's contact with the ball apply an impetus to the ball that resulted in interfering with the defense's opportunity to make a play?

If the answer to either #1 or #2a AND #2b is "Yes", I have a dead ball and an out. Otherwise, play on.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by teebob21

It might not be the "right" way to judge this, but I mentally approach U3K+INT as the following:

1. Did the BR move in a way judged to intentionally contact the ball?
2a. Before contact, did any defender have an opportunity to make a play on the ball?
2b. Did the BR's contact with the ball apply an impetus to the ball that resulted in interfering with the defense's opportunity to make a play?

If the answer to either #1 or #2a AND #2b is "Yes", I have a dead ball and an out. Otherwise, play on.

This is precisely what I was getting at earlier in this thread. Using "intentionally" in any part of your approach renders it inaccurate. The rule 8.2-F does not add that condition, nor does any discussion in RS#33.

According to the rule, the RS, and the definition of interference, if the BR commits an act which interferes with the defense making a play, it is a dead ball out. That means that even if you think the act was inadvertent and unintentional, if it interferes, the rule applies. You don't get to make excuses for the offense keeping the defense from making a play.

[MD Longhorn]

Intentional does matter. It's not required - not at all... but if you have something intentional, you don't have to have anything else.

If you have nothing intentional, THEN all the other things that are being discussed come into play.

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Intentional does matter. It's not required - not at all... but if you have something intentional, you don't have to have anything else.

If you have nothing intentional, THEN all the other things that are being discussed come into play.

Agreed. If an offensive player ever goes out of their way to kick, slap, bump, or otherwise touch a loose ball, then I have INT immediately. All other circumstances require additional judgment of the situation.

To Steve's point, though, I agree we can't make excuses for the offense keeping the defense from making a play. I can only recall a single instance of this occurring where I did not have INT. I should have included rule support for each of my considerations. If I had a current ASA rulebook handy, I would have added the citations in my previous post.