|
POEs apply where they apply. As I said way back at the beginning, my issue with what you did was not that you warned the catcher per se, but that you told the catcher that you would call something as CO that was not CO.
CO has a meaning - as we have pointed out several times in this thread - the thing being "obstructed" is the batter's opportunity to hit the ball. It has nothing to do with where the catcher's mitt is unless the catcher is obstructing the batter.
The POE on catcher's obstruction assumes that there has been an infraction of CO, and it explains the interpretations of that infraction. You cannot apply the part about the mitt being over the plate unless by doing so, the catcher is obstructing the batter. Merely being over the plate is not, by itself, and infraction.
__________________
Tom
|