SoCalASABlue wrote:What I have been told in the clinics I have attended for SoCal ASA is that you can NEVER assume a double play would have been successful had there not been interference, intentional or uinintentional.
I don't doubt that there is something in the rule book that would allow such an assumption as described by MTR.
It is called "judgment" which is why you are there, right? If you were not going to use judgment, you cannot possibly umpire.
The rule, which I cited and is nothing new, simply states if the umpire judges the interfering runner's actions were an attempt to prevent a double play. Nothing states that you are assuming it would be completed.
However, it's hard enough to get some umpires to call illegal pitches, much less an intentional interference double play.
And they accept money for not doing their job?
You know, your statement above is often repeated by coaches, parents and fans on this and many other boards. I don't think this is something an umpire should be using as an excuse, do you? I know it is true for some, but so are a lot of things that we don't say aloud.Therefore, had I been the Base Umpire I have a dead ball, R1 out for interference, and the batter-runner safe at first base.
Sounds good to me.
