Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dakota
Maybe you have been visualizing something different from me in this discussion. I've been visualizing the catcher still behind the batter, reaching over the plate. The batter is doing what the batter does, without regard to the catcher. That is not CO merely because the catcher has moved her mitt over the plate.
|
My visualization was from a game situation I had just this past week:
The batter was up in the box,
The catcher's feet were forward of the back corners of the batter's boxes,
When the catcher had set up her target, her mitt was over the plate,
I held up the pitch, instructed her to move back, which she did without incident,
My comment was that she could get a CO if she touched the ball before it finished crossing the plate.
Earlier in the thread, there was a dispute about the existance of any rule that would justify the PU moving a catcher back. We established that there is such a rule, (although those who challenged the existence of the rule, have not acknowledged it.)
The last few posts are into the "what-if" scenarios which bring the rule into play. Different scenarios have different visualizations.