Mon Oct 06, 2003, 10:42am
|
|
Official Forum Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,236
|
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Bfair
Quote:
Originally posted by Dave Hensley
Lane violation doesn't work on this play because it happened right on top of the bag, where staying in the runner's lane is no longer required.
PU apparently called a generic, intentional interference which trumped U1's safe call.
|
Hmmmmm..........
I didn't see the play, but if it's not a lane violation, then why is the PU coming in on the BU's call?
Wasn't there argument that the rules state that all calls on the bases belong to the BU? Could it be that interference and obstruction are not designated to any individual umpire?
Should the PU have approached the BU after the play to "add the information" of what he felt he saw that apparently the BU didn't see?
What about the mechanic of the PU making this call?
Was it correct?
Freix
[Edited by bob jenkins on Oct 6th, 2003 at 09:02 AM]
|
If you had seen it you wouldn't have any problem with the call.
__________________
Rich Ives
Different does not equate to wrong
|