Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cbfoulds
Sure I do, he's the one ... STANDING RIGHT THERE.
I certainly know that there were 2 runners on base, one scored, and one is still there. I can certainly go to the scorebook and determine that the fellow who "scored" is after the fellow who is still standing on a base in the BO; from this information I can certainly derive proof beyond any reasonable doubt that a switch has occurred. At which point I'm adopting mbyron's course of action, and I'm ejecting every possible culprit I can find. I'm also cancelling the run, 'tho I'm less sanguine about my rule support for this one; but that's OK - I DARE the cheating ba$tards to protest.
|
Thank you. In fact, I watch for this kind of thing when multiple runners are on. But if, as in the OP, I had missed it, I could easily look it up in the book. Maybe some people don't know that umpires are allowed to do this.
Dave's right that BOO would cause the same symptoms, and he's also right that these things unravel fast under scrutiny. Moreover, although I don't keep the lineup in my head, I do notice whether the little guy batted before or after the big guy.
We can't use the rule against passing another runner, which applies only during live ball and is a baserunning mistake, not an act of cheating.
As for allowing the run, I just can't see it. I don't accept the analogy of an illegal bat or glove: those are specific rule violations with specific penalties attached. This blatant act of cheating must be corrected, or there would be too much cheese for future rats.
And, as Carter so neatly points out: I'd love to attend the protest hearing over my canceling the run.