re: It’s interference. With visual evidence and the rule

quote:

---

that is purely a judgement call.

There is a designated running lane that was violated. that caused the catcher to have to make a mental adjustment because the runner was violating the rule. That should not be rewarded.

I think that 'interfering with the throw' was probably put into the rule book to handle things like a throw from third base, where the position of the runner does not influence the execution of the normal throw.

In this case, the catcher has to make an accommodation to a normal throw to avoid hitting the runner who is in his normal range for making the play.

it is a 'judgement' call by the umpire - and in this case I think the judgement was wrong.

and yes - it SHOULD have been no problem to make the proper throw - doesn't mean the runner should be given the grace to violate HIS responsibility to run in the PROPER lane.

The runner had already "got lucky" in not striking out on the pitch - he barely tipped the ball - and then violated the lane rule. He deserved no laxity in interpretation the rule.

---

This is exactly what happened. They just ruled against us, contrary to what the article states would happen "more often than not" at the CWS.