[Kaliix]

Rich,
Some rules are written more clearly and intelligently than others.

I was not discussing 7.08(a)(1) but since you brought it up, that rule, specifically the 3 ft rule from a direct line between bases, pertains only to when a runner is trying to avoid a tag, with the exception of avoiding a fielder making a play on the ball.

That is why a runner is allowed create his own baseline.

Saying that my reading of the rule is only an interpretation is nonsense. It reminds of me of Clinton arguing the defintion of the word "is". Certainly some written sentences, paragraphs, etc. are open to interpretation. However the point of writing rules is that they be written so that they clearly and specifically define the parameters of a game.

If the rules are not clear and allow for "interpretation" then they should be rewritten so that they are clear, precise and mean what they intended to mean. Extending another rule, 7.10(d) by an interpretation to cover what another rule already clearly defines is wrong.

7.10(b) seems well written and cannot be over-ridden by an extension and interpretation of another rule.

If the rule is does not state what it should then rewrite it.

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser

That's fine, as long as you are willing to accept everything in the rule book as correct and written correctly.

Read 7.08(a)(1). Now, a "direct line between bases" seems to be pretty straight-forward, doesn't it? Why, then, do we allow baserunners to establish their own baseline?

Your reading of the "actual written rule" is your interpretation, nothing more and nothing less. Baseball people smarter than you and I don't read the rules the same way. We should listen to them.