|
I inferred the logic he was following was this:
BR scored, effectively stranding R2 in a "missed base" situation, since R2 has not touched the base. R2 must now touch the base after BR, but 8-3-G says she cannot (if properly appealed).
His logic is that since R2 did not touched the plate before BR, that is a "missed base."
Maybe I'm getting some glimmer here of why this took a couple of hours to resolve at the field!
__________________
Tom
|