Baseball
Related: About this forumDid the fan interfere with Betts over the field?
After looking at several angles, I say yes, the fan did. Joe West got the call right. In the best photo that I saw, I could clearly see the fan leaning over the field and impeding Betts' glove as the ball was incoming. The fan subsequently not only closed Betts' glove, but prevented him from moving it rightward (standing at home plate looking out) to get to the ball with an open glove.
Croney
(4,925 posts)redstateblues
(10,565 posts)ADX
(1,622 posts)...but I'm a die-hard, life-long Yankees fan and I hate the Red Sux so there's that...
the ball was over the fence. No interference.
But MLB and the networks can't fathom a Houston/Milwaukee World Series, so they'll do what they can to prevent it.
ADX
(1,622 posts)...More than most people realize...
I almost don't want to watch tonight
mikeysnot
(4,772 posts)Circuses...
Stare Decisis
(229 posts)relative to the wall. Had his arm been over that wall I believe that shadow would have been closer to 90 degrees. At any rate, like I said earlier, when an ump sees a ball knocked out of the glove, what do you expect?
He catches that ball without interference. Morally I care not if that fan was a few inches to his side.
But Betts really needs a light on top of his cap, so other aircraft can see him at night.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)underpants
(186,691 posts)The local ground rules say that if the fans reach across (regardless if the hit the ball or player) its interference. They clearly reached over. Betts was over the fence and would have had the ball.
benld74
(9,996 posts)The stands to keep people away from the plays😅
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)The cages would have to be color coded to distinguish a still in play ball from one that is gone. Smart ball players will figure out how to make a non catch look like a catch, so there will still be controversy. I think cameras positioned high above the railings and out of reach of baseballs may be the best option, when combined with replay.