Have you seen the mega thread on an Iowa women’s basketball player?
Hawkeyes whining about postseason baseball
- Thread starter JP4CY
- Start date
The baserunner appears to be approaching the base from the outfield side of the baseline which is perfectly legal. He has a clear unobstructed path to the outside half of the base. He chooses to alter his path to the inside of the base for no reason other than to impede the fielder making a play. That is enough to make a case for interference. Part of what goes into the umpire's judgement is does it impact the outcome of the play. If the batter-runner beat the play at 1st by a full step or more, you probably let the play at 2nd go with a no call. If it's a bang-bang safe call at 1st, the defense gets the benefit of the doubt with an obstruction call. The baserunner pays the price for taking an unnecessary angle into 2nd.
I think given the national attention that gets I can understand that more than a thread about a Hawkeye sport that we don't even play.
And, honestly, there's two blue bloods that wield all the power. My favorite example of this was Nebraska wanting to play football during the covid season and the Big Ten saying no about a million times. Ohio State then said they wanted to play and the Big Ten couldn't say yes fast enough.
I read something about it being a different rule in NCAA and it being all about him being out of the base path, but I can't see him out of the base path in that replay. The claim there was it is a bad rule but called correctly.
Did it seem like they gave the infielder the neighborhood play I've seen them call not an out in college ball? Seems like you can't grant that and also say it's interference. But maybe it's just me missing something on an Twitter video on a phone screen.
Dochterman mentioned baseball as the sport Iowa might have to drop with the new NIL salaries paid by schools on his last IE pod. In the hypothetical, said it was the most likely men's sport.
KidSilverhair
Well-Known Member
The baseline is a direct path from where the runner is to the base. I can’t see him deviating from that at all.
I could see, maybe, if I squint really hard and tilt my head, the notion of the runner going to a different part of the base in an attempt to interfere with the fielder … no, really, I can’t, the runner is going to the base, inside or outside doesn’t matter, he’s making a normal, legal slide, not trying to “take out” the fielder in any way. He does throw the right hand up there, that’s maybe an issue, but … he didn’t actually end up interfering with the fielder’s throw in any way, from what I could see. But again, I am not an NCAA umpire, they upheld the call in review, there must have been something there I’m just not seeing or I’m misinterpreting (totally possible, my umpiring experience has been limited to U13 baseball, lol).
We are in heated agreement. The only thing I can think of is did he deviate from the basepath before he is seen in the video prompting the fielder to step toward the infield to avoid where he appears to be heading? If he was on the grass before appearing on the video maybe that is what they saw.
EDIT: watching the video again, even this reach doesn't seem to make sense since the fielder is just making the play at the bag when the video starts and the runner is already in frame and appears to be legal. A headscratcher surely. I guess not all calls are going to be as clear cut as the invalid fair catch signal call.
