Quote:
Originally posted by Bfair
Actually, the point I was trying to make was as follows:
Fed rule:
---8-2-1 requires runner to advance to base
---8-2-1 penalty says umpire will call out if not done
---9-1-1a says no run if 3rd out by BR failing to reach 1st base
---9-1-1-e provides beneficial "last" out to defense
---all other Fed examples acknowledge that a missed 1st base when declared out negates run
---PBUC ruling says BR must advance to 1st even if 3rd out is made elsewhere on the play
---no contradictory ruling by Fed showing otherwise, therefore---------
Summation: BY RULE---call BR out and negate run. Look like a jerk on the field.
In reality, this is one not to call.
|
Steve, what you are missing here is that the 4th out allowed by PBUC is a
non-appeal 4th out. The batter-runner is NOT out for "missing" 1st base. He is out instead under OBR 6.05(j) because the PBUC says the defense can correct their error in not playing on the BR for the 3rd out! FED doesn't allow appeals of "missed" bases that runners haven't yet reached, any more than does OBR.
If FED suddenly decides to allow 5 strikes and 7 balls, providing the batter is the first in the lineup on a Shrove Tuesday, does this mean we should also do so in OBR? You are once again poking a lance at Carl, this time about borrowing rulings from other codes. I wholeheartedly agree with Carl that "borrowing rulings" from other codes is a legitimate approach IF you are using those rulings in order to make an OBR 9.01(c) on-field determination that you fear might later be protested. Some authoritative support for your on-field decision is better than NONE at all, right? However, I'm sure even YOU would agree that you should also use your OWN common sense and NOT "borrow rulings" that neither you nor anyone else in their right mind, much less a protest committee, can easily follow! That's the case here, IMHO.
Now, please, stop jousting at Carl with off-topic issues every time he makes a post in this forum. It is already obvious to all and sundry that you disagree with most everything Carl says, and that you consider him to be a hypocrite who changes his position from post to post to suit his own ends. As
WRONG as you most certainly are about that, Steve, you'll NEVER convince everyone else using this forum to go along with your faulty premise. Give it up, please!
Cheers,