Thu Apr 10, 2008, 03:48pm
|
|
Official Forum Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dakota
This sounds suspiciously like the discussion some months back about a BR hitting a fly ball into the outfield and being obstructed on the way to 1B and the fly ball was caught. The ASA ruling was, "yeah, well, but we don't want it called that way"... or words to that effect.  The NFHS ruling was the same result (BR out) but was illogical as it tried to warp the rules to make it sound like they applied. At least the ASA's "because we say so" was direct. (All of this from memory, and I'm too lazy to go back and look it up.)
I suspect, following the logic ASA used before in ruling that the "between bases" provision does NOT trump all after all, they will want the runner ruled out for a base running infraction not caused by the obstruction. But, who knows? |
Right, I should have remembered. But that was more obvious.
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT.
It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
|