Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mcrowder
I do recall that caseplay, and recall a great deal of banter both here and at a clinic. The result at the clinic was that there was no rules-basis for the caseplay, and in cases where a caseplay and the rulebook contradict, we go with the rulebook. If I recall correctly here, the situation devolved quickly but the main point of those arguing FOR an out was that the ball was still live during the misconduct and ejection (I don't agree with that either, but it is a distinctive point between that one and the OP here). In this case, the runner is running out an award and the ball is dead.
In any case, an umpire ruling an out on an ejection is doing so without the backing of a rule (I guess rule 10 would be his only backing).
|
The 2005/06 Case Book cites rule 10-8a, 10-1j3 and 10-1k-correct rule interpretation for flagrant misconduct. Page 108.
Rule 10 identifies guidelines for umpires and identfies general information with the caveat:
The plate umpire shall have the authority to make decisions on any situations not specifically covered in THESE rules.
And, failure of umpires to adhere to Rule 10 shall not be grounds for protest.