The List Again
The following list was posted several times. I add an excerpt from one of Carl Childress' recent posts to promote conversation on the American League 1986 Playoff Game three play posted above.
...Second, it's not MY LIST. It's a compilation of five instances where the rules, official interpretation, or current practice sanction a changed call. Three of those are judgment calls that are changed IN SPITE OF the language of 9.02(a).
Let me go over the list one more time, individually. If anyone disagrees, please let us know. On the other hand, if you believe these five instances do represent calls that may be changed legally, stop denigrating the list!
1. Two umpire make opposite calls on the same play. I argue that one of those calls will be legally changed to match the other. Does anyone disagree?
2. The plate umpire calls "Ball, no he didn't go!" and the catcher asks him to get help. The appropriate base umpire may legally say, "Yes, he did." (9.02c CMT) Does anyone disagree?
3. An umpire misinterprets a rule, and another umpire corrects his error. (9.02b and c) Does anyone disagree?
4. A call of foul is changed to fair or a home run becomes a double (also vice versa). Fitzpatrick interpretation, common practice in the major leagues. Does anyone disagree that it occurs? Does anyone disagree that it is done legally?
5. A ball comes loose on a tag for an out, and another umpire sees it. (9.02c; JEA) Does anyone disagree?
If you believe there are other instances that can be legally changed, please post them and the authoritative opinion supporting that ruling....
I am not sure there is an actual answer besides Cooney screwed up perhaps in positioning if not in mechanics. Jim/NY
|