Quote:
Originally posted by Kaliix
Carl, with all due respect, if Tony is insisting on calling all the FED rules then the size of the strike zone is a legitimate question.
If FED doesn't want the high strike called, why is it still on the books? They clearly have no trouble differentiating themselves from OBR. Why wouldn't they change the strike zone defintion if that's not how they wanted it called?
|
Kaliix: Bringing up the strike zone is known as a "red herring."
That has nothing to do with the rules. If an umpire gets a
rule wrong, the game is subject to protest. We know that strike/ball, safe/out, fair/foul are judgment and thus not subject to protest. If you call a runner safe at first, does that mean you misinterpreted a rule when it can be shown he did not beat the throw?
Tony (and I and others) is arguing that "waving the glove" is, by rule, a balk in a game played under NFHS rules.
What do you think?