- Oct 6, 2020
- 8
- 3
I appreciate the discussion ... no offense at all. This is how we learn and I do make mistakes. I challenge my student to prove me wrong ... because I do require proof!
Yes, the frame I posted is after the runner passed and the alleged interference occurred. I posted that frame to show how far off the fielder was when she reacted to the ball and, in my judgment, why the runner did not hinder or impede the fielder. From what I see, we have a fielder who made a bad read on a ball.
Watching it at 1/4 speed, I see a fielder who is too busy watching the runner instead of playing the ball. The runner did not cause that. I cannot protect a fielder who is not playing the ball. Could it have been interference if the fielder had been under the ball and playing it? Possibly. It is tough to penalize a player for bad play, but we also cannot reward them for it.
What would I have needed for an interference call? A continual motion by the fielder to get to the ball. It is very possible my read of her misread is incorrect, but that is what I see when a fielder runs to the wrong spot, stops, and then has to readjust at the last moment because she lost the ball. I would want to see her eyes on the ball with a glance to the runner, not looking at the runner most of the way and then picking the ball up as it is close to hitting the ground.
Varsity game yesterday, R2 stealing third. The catcher takes two steps while getting behind the batter to make the throw. She was not avoiding the batter, she just chose to go wide. As she reaches that spot, the batter begins to back up. The throw gets off clean, but it was close to being an interference call. Coach comes out to ask. Another couple of inches and I definitely would have had the call. Had the catcher just come up and thrown I would have had the call. The reason I didn't give the call was because the catcher moved to her position on her own. It was a bad position, but it was her position, the batter did not force her there. The batter moved that way, but didn't cause the catcher to have to keep going.
I see the same thing here. The runner may have been there, but the runner is not what forced any of that to occur.
Does the level of play affect this call? I will say, "Possibly." Maybe I am applying too strict of a standard and these are lower level or less experienced players and we should be giving the interference call. As many have said, too many variables that we don't have answers to.
I know this thread is a little old, but at 1/4 speed, it appears to me that 2b is moving towards the ball and has to stop her progress because of the runner. Isn't that a classic case of runner interference?