NCAA Video: What do you have? Or nothing?

[noumpere]

In NCAA and higher level ball it looks like the fielder stopped to let the runner by - his movement wasn't the startled kind of "wtf is that" that you would of needed to get interference here because thats where the runner actually hinders the fielder. Fielders are taught to just keep going gfor the ball. Now if your doing 12u or something maybe maybe you read the fielders actions as being caused by the runner and not wanting to get into the collisions, so maybe you get the interference. In between well thats why we get paid all the $$$$.

[dumbdumb]

I don't understand the argument that the runner is doing what he is supposed to be doing.

The rules clearly state that he is supposed to avoid a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball, which is not what R1 did.

Thank you. That's what I posted earlier about there being a different standard for INT vs OBS.

Everybody I talk to states that there should be contact though. I will let the cat out of the bag though. I saw this clip on replay while I was up w/ my sick daughter at like 1:30am. I tivo'd it and put it on here for you guys...(this was Friday morning), then Friday night, I had the exact same play, except not a bunt...and in my judgment the runner impeded the fielder from making the play and I banged him for INT.

There are people on here who disagree with me, but I just don't see how that doesn't meet the standard when you don't need contact for obstruction??

Okay. So what did the umpires on the field rule, since it appears we are done debating the merits of whether or not Interference? I don't think we are saying there needs to be contact, but I don't see how R1 prevented F4 from making a play he would likely not have made anyway. F4's first move was to stop, thinking F1 had the play. After he saw that F1 wasn't going to get there, he took off. Had he read the play better, he would have gotten in on the grass and R1 would have passed behind him. That's how I thing people are seeing this as not INT. It was a tough play, not a routine out. It was an excellent bunt--one that usually results in a base hit, even in professional baseball. I think the only reason it was even close is that the BR was not a speedster himself. A Ricky Henderson-type would have beaten it out without a throw. That's my opinion, and I'm sticking to it!

Agreed, however I would like to add to the above "F4's first move was to stop, thinking F1 had the play". When I look at it, he actually stops and "takes a step with his left foot backwards and towards first base, thinking F1 had the play at the .13 part of the second replay"

[Jocko]

I don't watch all the slo-mo replays. I try to see it as BU saw it in real time to get my gut reaction. After I decide what I saw/didn't see I watch slo-mo. My gut said no INT.