Wed Apr 19, 2006, 04:32pm
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lakeside, California
Posts: 6,724
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mcrowder
Uh, Steve.... What?!?!
Yes, he's retired, and no, he's not required to go back to first. Did you misread?
In any of these scenarios, in either ruleset, I'm pretty comfortable saying that you have to have INTENT to rule interference.
|
mcrowder,
I was referring to Tim's other scenario on the line drive to F6. I thought my post would be immediately underneath his, but there are several between us. I wasn't talking about the original play.
__________________
Matthew 15:14, 1 Corinthians 1:23-25
|