|
Freix's newest point is much more professionally proffered. But after careful consideration of Freix's, Patrick's, and Carl Childress's arguments, to me Carl's wins out. Because my primary officiating is in Football, where non-safety fouls are not called unless there at the point of attack and provide an unfair advantage, my perspective may differ. There is holding on nearly every play, but how fun would the game be for the players and spectators if football fouls were as plentiful as basketball fouls? So after reading many publications on Baseball officiating, I think Carl's answer to his critics like Freix is well taken:
"Absolutely nothing can be gained by calling out that runner. The purpose of the rule requiring runners to touch every base in turn is to ensure that they advance around the field in an orderly fashion. A runner skips third trying to score on a single. A runner going from first to third misses second. Those runners tried to gain an advantage not intended by the rules. Those runners, if appealed, deserve to be out on the merits of the plays.
"On the contrary our [walked-in runner] gained no advantage. . . . Save your career. Deny that appeal. [¶] To be sure, I admit there is a huge group of amateur umpires [like Freix and Patrick] who disagree with me on that point. . . . [¶] . . . But if that play ever happens to you, when you call out that runner, you may be sure it is a decision that will haunt you for as long as you pull on the mask." 51 Ways at pp. 35-36.
|