View Single Post
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 17, 2004, 03:49pm
SC Ump SC Ump is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 994
I am not familiar with either Canadian orthodox or reformed (j/k) rules. With that being said, I would agree with your ruling.

I would also agree with you that the on-deck batter "intentionally" touched the ball, but I don't think he intentionally interfered with the play. It sounded like he just didn't have his head in the game.
__________________
Dan
Reply With Quote