Quote:
Originally Posted by Manny A
Sure, why not? Couldn't you argue that because the obstruction prevented the lead runner from touching home, the trail runner was also affected by the obstruction because she had to stop in order to let the lead runner legally touch the plate? That would seem cleaner than ignoring that the obstructed runner can no longer legally touch the plate when the trail runner scored, and using 10.1 as justification.
|
So you are suggesting an active runner just stop and stand there placing themselves in jeopardy due to a defender violating the rules ASSUMING the umpire will get it right?
Good luck selling that to a player or coach. BTW, that used to be the suggested action when an OBS runner went down, that the trailing runner not pass and allow the umpire to make the appropriate ruling. That changed at the 2011(or 2013) UIC Clinic when an updated interpretation was offered. Personally, I would love if it were that simple, but it is not.
I stand by my previous post. And 10.1 isn't a justification, it is authorization.