Quote:
Originally posted by mbyron
Quote:
Originally posted by cbfoulds
Neither have I seen any case play or ruling that would prohibit a runner [who is not otherwise out] from erasing a baserunning error/ 4th out situation, nor have you supplied one [I've asked twice - I think we may take it as given that there are none].
|
Well. I'd say that we're getting into "burden tennis" here, knocking the burden of coming up with a rule/ruling/citation back and forth.
|
I am hoping that you chose my post as a starting place 'cause it illustrates "burden tennis" [my day job is litigation: I get it]; since the rest of what I have written on this topic agrees with what [I think] your post argues: that we need some more definitive rule verbiage or a clear ruling/ precedent before we start taking our positions and setting them in concrete.
Folks who have read my other "contributions" to the 'net umpiring debates will recall that I am not a big fan of pulling 9.01c out of the ball bag to solve every unclear sitch that comes down the pike. However, there are times when there is no other answer available.
In the circumstances being discussed here, I see no clear RULE which solves the problem in all circumstances [well, the original post WAS easy: the runner was already out]. A logical case can be made for the position taken by DG
et als., although I disagree with it. In playing "burden tennis", I am merely highlighting that [absent relevent authoritative and complete authority or precedent] we are in 9.01c territory here, and everyone is simply arguing their own opinions: which are proverbially like ***holes - everybody's got one, and they are all full of [sewage].
If there is a clear rule or ruling, I'll follow it. In the absence of "higher authority", I've given the 9.01c ruling I'd make and the basis for it: if it works for you, feel free to use it- no attribution or royalties required. IF not, heck, it's a 9.01c "freebie": pick 'em.