[devilsadvocate]

I get the feeling that some posters believe that umpires will abuse 9.01c when it is used.

They've seen examples, like DDonnelly19 illustrated, were an umpire does something that violates the wording of the book and uses the "authority of 9.01c" to do it. And it makes them cringe. And doing so is wrong. "Anything not specifically covered" is the wording. So for everyone that has witnessed Smitty and the 1+1 call, I understand. But remember, it is the umpire that is at fault, not the rule.

They've seen examples of envoking 9.01c when there is already a rule that covers a specific situation. Many people have referred to that as "hiding behind the rule to make up for a lack of knowledge". An umpire that will study the rules, discover why those rules are in the book, and then properly apply those rules will make a better umpire. He also won't run into a situation where he has to "resort to common sense and fair play." But consider, the umpire may be using the wrong rule, but he's going in the right direction.

And of course, in their wildest imaginations, they picture the umpire whose authority has run amock, telling managers to take a lap around the field for Batting Out of Order violations, pushups for slinging the bat, and an out if the shirt isn't tucked in. Personnally, I think that this kind of statement is ridiculous. If you believe that you know of an umpire in your association that would use 9.01c to make a player run laps, please remove him from your association.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I believe that most umpires understand the rules and know the spirit and intent of those rules. I also believe that most umpires have good judgement. I think most umpires will use both when they use 9.01c.