View Single Post
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jul 14, 2007, 10:54pm
fitump56 fitump56 is offline
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: In a hut
Posts: 911
Send a message via AIM to fitump56 Send a message via MSN to fitump56 Send a message via Yahoo to fitump56 Send a message via Skype™ to fitump56
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigUmp56
From Evans.



. The action by the batter which causes interference does not have to be intentional. The batter is obligated to avoid making any movement which obstructs, impedes, or hinders the catcher's play in any way. A swing which carries the batter over home plate and subsequently complicates the catcher's play or attempted play should be ruled interference. Contact between the batter and catcher does not necessarily have to occur for interference to be ruled. Merely blocking the catcher's vision to second base may very possibly be interference.

Tim.
Tim, thanks so much for that exact quote. Earlier you informed me, again with exact quotes, from J/R. I respect anyone who takes the time to type word for word, without any misssspellings, these Kings Of Interps.
__________________
"Never try to teach a pig to eat reasonably. It wastes your time and the pig will argue that he is fat because of genetics. While drinking a 2.675 six packs a day."

Last edited by bob jenkins; Sun Jul 15, 2007 at 04:41pm.
Reply With Quote