View Single Post
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 18, 2003, 12:50am
greymule greymule is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Posts: 3,100
Do we have an English/grammer teacher in the house.

I spent a dozen years teaching writing and grammar at a several large companies, with particular attention to communicating, unambiguously and concisely, exactly what is meant, and not leaving any room for misinterpretation. Companies have on occasion lost millions of dollars because employees misunderstood unclear instructions. My work involved methods and procedures, policies and directives, replies to customers, public relations documents, communications with government, and so on. Since correct grammar aids in accuracy (and credibility), we spent two full days (out of five) on it.

Long ago, I spent a few years teaching high school English, but I can't say that really qualifies—it involved very little grammar or writing.

Now I spend my time editing medical education and research papers, as well as reports to various foundations and government agencies. I edit documents all day long for correctness and accuracy. Unfortunately, I can't turn off the switch when I read rule books and case books.

Now to the the baseball question:

"If, upon appeal, ..." speaks to appeal plays being a third out. "If such a third out is the result of a force play..." speaks to third outs NOT appeal plays.

The key is the word such. OBR 7.12 begins by talking about a preceding runner failing to touch or retouch a base, a situation that leads to appeal plays. Then it says, "If, upon appeal, the preceding runner is the third out . . ." and then, "If such third out is the result of a force play. . . ." The word such defines the third out they're talking about as being an appeal out. Had they meant the sentence to refer to third outs in general, they would have said simply, "If a third out is the result of a force play." (They could have said that, too. Appeal plays would have been included!)

The various rule books contain many passages that are ambiguous and sometimes even technically factually incorrect. Rule books also do not cover every contingency. As can be seen from these various examples involving missed bases and force plays, if all we had were the words in the rule book, we could argue these things indefinitely. So we have case books and PBUC and BRD and J/R and calls to MLB umpires.
__________________
greymule
More whiskey—and fresh horses for my men!
Roll Tide!
Reply With Quote