Quote:
Originally posted by fwump
OK
I will ask. If you as BU saw this play as I described, would you:
A. call interference, under FED 8-4-2c. Ring up the BR and eject R1 for throwing equipment.
B. call runner out on the tag by F4 and consider the contact incidental. Ignore the tirade and tossed equipment.
...
I have been intimidated by the "BIG DOGS" (not my nomenclature)on these sites and also the ones I know personally. No more. I am as capable as they are.
Mike
|
If I had seen what you have explained, I would have been in the category "A" answer.
But, perhaps the BU saw something slightly different. Maybe he saw a stumble/fumble by F4 before the tag attempt (I don't know - HTBT). Perhaps he didn't feel there was substantial enough contact to prevent the double play (Again, I don't know - HTBT). Tossing equipment, I've passed on that before (incorrectly, I might add). I've also ejected for it too - it seems easier to hold children accountable for their actions than a top notch high school player. Ejection of the HS player might mean the difference in a trip to State tournament or something - not that childish acts should be condoned but it makes an umpire stop and think... and then it might feel like it is too late to make the ejection call.
Now that last statement you made is out-of-line, or at least a bit of a stretch. Yes, there is no reason for you to be intimidated... but equally capable... I guess HTBT.
