Quote:
Originally posted by GarthB
Now then, do you or do you not call out batters hit by batted balls while in the fair portion of the batter's box?
GB
|
Quoted from JEA under Rule 6.05(g):
Customs and Usage: Professional umpires try to scrutinize the exact feet location of the batter when a drag bunt is attempted. In most all other situations in which the batter is hit with his fair batted ball, the ball is ruled "foul" if the batter is still within the confines of the batter's box. A similar umpiring axiom can be found in 6.0(h)...fair ball hitting bat a second time.
Well, Garth, it seems a ball striking a the batter
IS specifically addressed in authoritative opinion.
Quote:
Originally posted by GarthB
...I will take a hundred years of practice over the vagueness of the rule book
GB
|
Quoted from JEA under Rule 7.09(k):
7.09(k) It is interference by a batter or a runner when in running the last half of the distance from home base to first base while the ball is being fielded to first base, he runs outside (to the right of) the three-foot line, or inside (to the left of) the foul line and, in the umpires judgment, interferes with the fielder taking the throw at first base, or attempting to field a batted ball.
[snip]
The rule serves two purposes: (1) It prevents a runner from leaving the basepath and intentionally crashing into the player covering first base [my emphasis], and (2) It prevents a runner from illegally screening the player taking the throw at first.
Garth, I have put the rule and some passages from JEA reagrding the running lane. Please point out to me the "vague areas" you reference that you do not seem to understand in the writing of this rule. From what I see here, a LL player could interpret this rule. I don't see any "vague areas" but that may be due to my inabilities. Perhaps you may feel that the fielder should be capable of fielding the ball while the runner, outside his legal running lane, crashes him.
Now, would you care to address my questions as you, and others professing your position,
still seem to be avoiding them.
(1) Wouldn't one think in regards to your interpretation which is in direct contradiction to the written rule, that SOMEONE of recognized authoritative opinion would have put it in print???
(2) Since JEA states the purpose of the rule is that "It prevents a runner from leaving the basepath and intentionally crashing into the player covering first base", would that purpose differ whether the throw was coming from home vs. F6 or even F4?? Is it less dangerous when he gets crashed if the throw is from F6 or F4?
(3) Would you feel it appropriate to seek an official interpretation since your position apparently is not addressed in print by our most reknowned authoritative sources? If it is such a widely accepted practice (Childress, quoted: "it has been codified via the decisions of thousands of umpires in tens of thousands of games played all over the world.") wouldn't it be appropriate to "develop" the needed written support that apparently does not yet exist (after all these years)??
Until such time, I guess the authority to contradict the rule is best explained by Rich when he stated:
"All I know is that every "big dog" in the world (and I know ya love the phrase "big dog") calls it this way."
Just my opinion,
Freix