Protest in Oregon/Penn State

[johnnyg08]

What do we think? Does Penn State have a case or is the interference judgement vs a misapplication? 

NCAA 7-11-n

“A whole bat is thrown into fair or foul territory, whether intentionally or not, and it interferes with a defensive player attempting to make a play immediately after the batter becomes a batter-runner. Interference shall be called;

Note 1: The batter, after hitting a ball or becoming a batter-runner, has some responsibility about where they throw their bat so that it does not interfere with a defensive player making a play on the ball. However, once that initial play in the area of home plate is over, it would be unfair to punish the batter if the defense throws a ball toward home plate to attempt another play and F2 or another fielder steps on the bat.”

[grayhawk]

I do think interference should have been called. F2 stepped right on the bat, and even if it hindered him for a brief moment, it still hindered him. Think of some obstruction calls that are made in MLB where the runner is barely hindered and those calls are still made.

However, I do not think the protest will stand unless the crew's explanation was that the batter-runner didn't do it intentionally or something else that showed the rule was misapplied.

[Velho]

For completeness, looking across OBR, NCAA, NFHS, and LL, they all are the same.

OBR 5.09(a)(8) Comment "If a whole bat is thrown into fair or foul territory and interferes with a defensive player attempting to make a play, interference shall be called, whether intentional or not."

NFHS 7-3-6 "If a whole bat is thrown and interferes with a defensive player attempting a play, interference will be called."

LL 6.05(g)A.R. "If a bat is thrown into fair or foul territory and interferes with a defensive player attempting to make a play, interference shall be called, whether intentional or not."

[The Man in Blue]

Let me start with … RLI, anybody?

 

OK, now, let me parse the bat rule.  How long is a “thrown bat” a “thrown bat”?  At what point is it just a bat?  
 

I know I am reading into those rule cites (I am trying not to, but I am), but I read them as the thrown bat is causing interference because it in motion due of the throw.  Not because a discarded bat is laying on the field, in which case it is part of the field.

Think of it like the difference when we consider a second contact … there is a difference between the ball hitting the bat and the bat hitting the ball.