Dave, unless I misunderstand Mike, I believe this is where Mr. Rowe and I differ.
According to what I've seen/read from ASA, the award of 2B in your sitch is what they want us to do. No revision to a 3B award is called for due to the subsequent fielding error.
I DO understand the desire to change this to a triple more than I understand the desire to change an award based on a subsequent THROW into the infield. But to my mind, even this is not the intent of the rule or any interpretations I've read. I'm sure that if there's an interp out there (or even verbal direction from ASA) that makes this one an award of third base, Mike will correct me. I just haven't seen one if it exists.
Dakota - of all the SAF's (Subsequent Action Faction) I know, your opinion is the most respected. Too many simply feel, "This isn't fair, so I'm going to call it my way". You, at least, say, "This isn't fair, I'm going to argue for it to be fixed... but until then I will call it the way ASA tells me." And you preach that POV here.
I understand your point of view even if I disagree with it. I understand it slightly more on an initial fielding error than on an incoming throw, but when thinking of it along the veins of my first very long post, I still disagree.
I believe that 90% of the OBS I see at a local level, and probably at least 75% of the OBS I see at tournament level is truly inadvertent. It may even be fully 90% at tourney level, for the following reasons. If I were a coach who had the inclination to accidentally on purpose commit OBS at first base on what might be a triple or homer, in hopes that the umpires won't see/call it - I would feel this way MORE at a local level (lesser umpires in general) than I would feel at a tourney level.
What are your thought specifically on my previous long post?
__________________
"Many baseball fans look upon an umpire as a sort of necessary evil to the luxury of baseball, like the odor that follows an automobile." - Hall of Fame Pitcher Christy Mathewson
|