Quote:
Originally posted by LilLeaguer
The article itself is really a process piece about how the ruling was made. The ruling will apparently be published on the FED site (http://www.nfhs.org) sometime in the future.
According to Stevens, the committee that advised the rules editor particulary studied an infield ground ball situation. At the risk of overstepping the rights of "fair use," I'll quote one sentence: "If the ball is lodged in such a way that the defense has to throw the glove, the ball should be killed at once with bases awarded accordingly."
There is no indication that they ruled on the interaction of the "lodged" rule with the definition of a "catch" or worried about very late detection by the umpire of a lodged ball.
I'm new to this forum (and also as a subscriber to the paid site), but I will say that I'm a little disappointed that the article focused on an old ruling (made weeks at least before this discussion) and ignored some of the subtler points that were made in this forum.
LL
|
LilLeaguer: The Forum thread was the driving force behind Tim Stevens asking for an interpretation. Because of that, we umpires know that the FED did not act overnight. Their committee discussed the play at length. (Apparently, a play exactly like the one I put in the BRD, beginning in 1994, happened in California.)
The point: The interpretation that will be posted in January at the FED rules site is not the work of one person, as it so often was in the days of Brad Rumble. Mr. Hopkins asks around before he jumps into the fray.
Anyway, it won't affect you: The FED ruling isn't applicable to Little League. For that interpretation you'll have to ask Andy Konyar.