Botched Call ? Cal Baptist - UNC

[YoungBuck]

Best I could manage...

 

[MoJo]

99% is a vast over-exaggeration. Not saying there are ones that don't get it, but the vast majority of officials will get this call right.

Real life doesn't back that up. Umps don't make the call without contact. When interference is called, 1/2 the time the incorrect penalty is applied.

Best I could manage...

If that is the play in the OP.....no call.....WTF.

 

[Gtrips07]

Real life doesn't back that up. Umps don't make the call without contact. When interference is called, 1/2 the time the incorrect penalty is applied.

If that is the play in the OP.....no call.....WTF.

How many times do you call it?

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

 

[Lobster Birch]

Real life doesn't back that up. Umps don't make the call without contact. When interference is called, 1/2 the time the incorrect penalty is applied.

If that is the play in the OP.....no call.....WTF.

Yes, it is.

 

[Gambler Bob]

Best I could manage...

I personally believe that there was interference on that play.

Now you could discuss that the 2nd baseman tried to intentionally get the interference call but was a little to late. Surprised she played that ball the way she did. She was going to get eaten up by that ball with the in between hop. You can't see the runner so it is hard to tell if the ball was hit soft enough that she had to charge the ball the way she did.

 

[uncdrew]

I personally believe that there was interference on that play.

Now you could discuss that the 2nd baseman tried to intentionally get the interference call but was a little to late. Surprised she played that ball the way she did. She was going to get eaten up by that ball with the in between hop. You can't see the runner so it is hard to tell if the ball was hit soft enough that she had to charge the ball the way she did.

Yeah, ideally she would have been coming in way faster on that to play the right hop. And that would have gotten her the call, or she would have made the play.

Or she sits back on the next hop and gets the out at first. At least that's my take.


Now the fact they don't call it an error bugs me, because my DD is a pitcher and I'm way over-protective of her stats. That one hurts her WHIP and BAA and with two on, might affect her ERA.

 

[uncdrew]

99% is a vast over-exaggeration. Not saying there are ones that don't get it, but the vast majority of officials will get this call right.

Just because the offense does something does not mean there is automatically interference. While there does not need to be contact and we don't want to encourage contact, the defense cannot do nothing or just completely quit and claim interference. The defense still has to be attempting a play for interference to occur. This can be a very tenuous line and 99.9% of the time will be a HTBT (had to be there) call.

I don't know if it is out there, but I would love to see video of the OP described play.

Curious to get your take. I certainly don't think the 2B gave up on the play. I'm no rules expert so never go all ballistic about things, but I feel like I've seen a runner called out for running in front of the fielder on a grounder (and no contact made).

 

[The Man In Blue]

Curious to get your take. I certainly don't think the 2B gave up on the play. I'm no rules expert so never go all ballistic about things, but I feel like I've seen a runner called out for running in front of the fielder on a grounder (and no contact made).

Sorry, was dead tired and doing the volleyball thing the last few nights.

On my first look, my immediate thought was, "Looks like interference." I agree F4 certainly did not give up on the play. To understand the no call, I pulled up the NCAA verbiage.

NCAA
1.13 Interference
Equipment or the act of an offensive player, coach, umpire or spectator that denies the fielder a reasonable opportunity to play the ball. The act may be intentional or unintentional and the ball must have been playable.

Did the runner deny "the fielder a reasonable opportunity to play the ball?"
She did not. The fielder made a play on the ball. The other thing I saw that would have dissuaded me from an interference call is that the fielder never changed any course of her action. She had a bad approach and missed the ball, but she never changed her approach or motion due to the runner.

If we were calling this game under another code, there is a different standard to apply (the traditional "obstructs, impedes, hinders, or confuses") and you might have a better case for an interference call.

Honestly, I don't read the NCAA book as much as I should (since the opportunity for me to call it around here is non-existent), so that didn't leap to mind right away.

 

[The Man In Blue]

Real life doesn't back that up. Umps don't make the call without contact. When interference is called, 1/2 the time the incorrect penalty is applied.

If that is the play in the OP.....no call.....WTF.

Side story ... last night I had a volleyball team that was rather, shall we say, "inexperienced with the sport." My partner refused a number of their substitutions because the girls were not coming up correctly (first sub in the substitution zone, subsequent subs on the other side of the attack line, lined up down the side line). After the game, the coach was pretty hot about this. It seems the officials where they are from have been telling them to line up in a single file line. I can't say that's not true, but I can say this ... where they were from, I know the officials in that city are notorious for backwoods/outdated practices in many sports. So ... I can't say your experience is not what you say. I guess I will just have to say, "Hire better officials."

From my experience, I stick by my claim. I would also add the vast majority of the time, the coach and parents incorrectly believe it is interference when it benefits them.

 

[uncdrew]

Side story ... last night I had a volleyball team that was rather, shall we say, "inexperienced with the sport." My partner refused a number of their substitutions because the girls were not coming up correctly (first sub in the substitution zone, subsequent subs on the other side of the attack line, lined up down the side line). After the game, the coach was pretty hot about this. It seems the officials where they are from have been telling them to line up in a single file line. I can't say that's not true, but I can say this ... where they were from, I know the officials in that city are notorious for backwoods/outdated practices in many sports. So ... I can't say your experience is not what you say. I guess I will just have to say, "Hire better officials."

From my experience, I stick by my claim. I would also add the vast majority of the time, the coach and parents incorrectly believe it is interference when it benefits them.

Love, love, love the parents on the teams my DDs play for.

However, they will always argue on the side of our team. They'll be yelling "She was safe!!!" when she was out by two steps if it's our team who was at bat. I won't say it's embarassing, but it's bordering on it.

And on the more obscure rules, many of them make up the rule definition on the fly that best suits our team. It's really quite crazy. I've wanted to ask "How do you know?". Guess it's just like discussing politics on twitter. Everyone is an expert on everything.