Quote:
Originally posted by greymule
If in fact the second part of Situation 13 defines new case law, then BRD 298-115 is out of date and incorrect. It is the SAME PLAY in every relevant particular: (1) runner is hit unintentionally by batted ball, (2) runner was in contact with a base, (3) ball did not pass an infielder, and (4) no infielder could have made a play.
Element #2 above is crucial here. Situation 13 and BRD 298-115 both deal with a runner ON THE BAG. If that were not a crucial element, why mention it at all?
If this new interpretation applies also to runners OFF the base, then we can throw out everything about "passes an infielder other than the pitcher" and write a simple new rule: "The runner is out if he is hit by a fair batted ball on which a fielder could have made a play. Exception: runner in contact with a base on a declared infield fly."
I'm asking the NJ interpreter tonight.
|
Greymule:
Here's what you're facing:
The BRD just appeared this year, so I can't fix the Section until the 2003 edition. (grin)
More importantly, the NJ interpreter may be like so many people on the Internet: "Well, if it ain't in the book...."
I never understand umpires.
Consider: The OBR book says the pitcher may pinch hit only for the DH.
And if he hits for someone else?
Ah, no penalty listed. So I asked Mike Fitzpatricak, and he says: "Well, thus and so." (Section 66 in the 2002 BRD.)
I post that official interpretation to a newsgroup called rec.sport.officiaing, and several "members," led by Scott Taylor (you think the novelist is slow?), say: "That's wrong!"
That's WRONG?
Who the hell are they kidding? The official answer to a problem is NEVER wrong.
That's what might happen with the NJ interpreter.
Look, the sky will not fall if an official interpretation by a rules entity contradicts black letter law. Generally, the FED and NCAA change the book. OBR never does.
If the batter-runner interferes before touching first base, where do any other runners go? Time of the pitch? Time of the interference? Could a run score?
Now, Pat suggests that maybe the interpretation was made by somebody who, like me on my first cursory reading, didn't fully understand the import of the language. If so, surely an umpire has brought it to their attention by now, and it's still there.
Let us know what the big boy in the Garden State says.