|
Interesting conflict.
8-4-2j Exception states that "No runner may be forced out if a runner who follows him in the batting order is first put out." In case 9.1.1H, R3 was put out before R2 (damn FED notation) and R3 followed R2 in the batting order. So, we'd not ahve a force out on the appeal.
But, 2-29-3 states that "For a given runner, a force play ends as soon as ... a following runner is put out AT A PREVIOUS BASE." (emphasis added) In case 9.1.1H, R3 was put out at the base to which R2 was forced -- not at a previous base. Therefor, R2 was still forced to third, and the out is a force out.
Maybe the case is saying that 2-29-3 takes precedence.
|