[NFump]

Your last post is reason enough for people to dismiss you. Please show me where in the RULE BOOK it allows a batter to do what the batter did in the original play. PBUC states that if he intended to do it you have an out. I have maintained that it is impossible to tell whether he intended to in this hypothetical play. He stood in the box and tossed the bat towards the home team dugout. He wasn't running towards frst when he chucked it backwards. No one has even offered that suggestion, but you cling to the notion that you can surmise whether the guy intended to hit the ball or not. Read the original play again and tell me where the author said that the batter aimed the bat. Go ahead, genius, have someone read it to you if the big words confuse you.

Wow! Like I have previously stated, if you want to judge intent on this then go ahead. That's what you're arguing anyway Windster. You keep bringing up that it's impossible to tell whether he intended to hit the ball or not. That's the whole point. If you don't know you can't call it. Much like not seeing the tag, if you don't see it you can't call him out. By the way, I'm the one saying there wasn't any intent, so you tell me where it says he aimed the bat.

Oh, another point you're wrong about, I said high school aged players not boys. Now you've sunk to outright lying to try and prove......what? Oh, you want me to insult you. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! There's no need for that, you're doing a very good job of opening your mouth (keyboard) and proving how big a fool you really are.