Was the interference called on the play back to first or the play on the runner advancing to 2nd? If he called it because she interfered on a defender being able to make a play on the runner advancing to second I can see it. The batter un-intentionally does knock the ball down preventing it from "possibly" bouncing to the catcher who now had to run down toward first to get the ball. I am not saying it is the correct call, but I could see why he made it. Thanks for posting, it is a rule I had never really seen before.
Retired batter interference?
- Thread starter grmerrill
- Start date
Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch
Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.
- Jun 22, 2008
- 3,438
- 48
IMO, you are reading way too much into this. You can TWP it all you want, but you need to make your decision based on what is in front of you.
LOL, thanks for the philosophy lesson Plato. I asked a question whether he called interference on the initial play or on the 2nd play as he doesn't call the out until after the first play is over (using the video as this is the info "in front of me"). This may be reading into it too much for some but I feel it really wasn't that deep of a question. I asked the question for my future reference, it may be beneath you but I was looking for clarification.
In the video the runner dives back into 1st base, that is one "play". She then gets up and runs to second, that is the 2nd "play". He does not call her out until after she is up and running. This is why ask what the umpire said the interference is on, the question is really for the OP only unless somebody else was there.
There is no play at first, the runner gets back before the ball. It isn't even close when the defender misses the ball, which is when the batter is hit. The ump calls an immediate dead ball, no defender even gets close to the ball to make a play on the runner so no play their either. No play, no interference.
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
Similar threads
