View Single Post
  #48 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jun 09, 2005, 06:52pm
UmpJM UmpJM is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,057
Send a message via Yahoo to UmpJM
Cool

JRutledge,

Based on the ruling made on the play and the deafening silence from MLB, I find myself compelled to agree with your assertion (as well as that of the numerous others who posted in the same vein on this thread).

My post above was merely a statement of fact, not an opinion on the play in question.

It has become clear to me that in MLB it is perfectly legal for a runner to leave his direct path to the base to which he is attempting to advance (perhaps as long as he stays "within reach" of said base - which Erstad certainly did) in order to intentionally crash a fielder who is in posession of the ball in an attempt to knock the ball loose from that fielder so that the fielder cannot complete a legal tag. I used to think differently. I learned something.

I believe I was hung up on the phrase "...unrelated to running the bases..." contained in the MLBUM cite I provided in an earlier post on this thread. Apparently it means something different from what I thought it meant. Now I know.

While I no longer dispute the ruling made on the field, I stand by my previous comments regarding MLB and the NHL.

JMO.

JM
Reply With Quote