[mbyron]

Why is that a counterexample? You said yourself that everyone in the place saw the miss. Everyone expected him to be called out on appeal, and PU made the expected call. That half the people didn't like it is business as usual when we call an out.

But regarding your more general point: you keep harping on "where do you draw the line." I take it that Carl and others have been suggesting that the art of making these calls requires developing the judgment to know when to call the out.

This is not an algorithmically determined science: to answer your question there would have to be a strict rule of the form: "Always call an out when (and only when) A, B, C, ... or Z." There is no such finite rule: any you might try to state would have exceptions, given the infinite permutations of the game.

When no exceptionless rule exists, some say, "well, I guess anything goes!" Not so: the easy outs are still easy. The only points of disagreement lie with the hard cases. And experience and good training are needed to inculcate good judgment and enable one to make those calls consistently. That's not a matter of learning a rule better.

So there's a satisfactory explanation of why nobody has answered your question. The explanation is that it has no answer since it's the wrong question.

Hm, I feel another article coming on...