[officialtony]

SDS,
I was talking abut the Quarterly article ( I didn't make that very clear although that was what the thread was about ). I did throw in some observations on my part that I probably should have been more specific about being my observations. As far as agreeing with me on the ruling, I didn't get that from any of your posts. You seemed intent on ringing him up rather than following the rule. But . . . you did not cover the scenario of the pitch being a ball until after my last post. So . . if you feel that the batter/runner gets 1st base for being hit by ball four, then we are in agreement. If you are one of those that is going to call strike three because you are ticked that he took the pitch intentionally, then we do not agree. Please understand that I am not awarding 1st base on the hit-by-pitch. I am awarding 1st base for the ball four that hit him. If it were ball 1, 2, or 3, he stays in the batters box. I apologize to you for any confusion on this with you - or any of the other posters for that matter.