[Rich Ives]

I'm not arguing the correcness of the call. This is just a general vent directed at no one in particular.

I'm not arguing that your job is to rule by precedent (case law in the legal prefession.) That's how things are done here.


What disturbs me is that, for this and many other interpretations, there is a mass of official rulings and accepted interpretations that are NOT AVAILABLE to the managers. It's the functional equivalent of going to court with a copy of the law but not having access to the case law. In court we have our own advocate who is supposed to keep up on the case law. Are managers supposed to hire an umpire to sit in the dugout and advise them of the rules interpretations?


Furthermore, while some interpretations make sense, others don't.

Some have seemingly good rationale. Example: B-R misses first - beats the throw - treat as missed base.

Some seem to be of the "That don't make no sense Joe" variety. Example: Overunning first on a walk. A strict reading (and the LL and "Knotty Problems" interp) is that there is no exception in the rules. However, someone somewhere said "That doesn't make sense, he doesnt NEED to ocerrun first, let's call him out." Voila! Can't overrun on a walk now.

Some seem to be matters of umpire convenience. "I don't want to decide intent so I'll just always assume it was there."


Next time the thought "dumb coach" crosses an umpires mind, he should ask himself when and how the manager ever had the opportunity to learn the interpretation.