Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ozzy6900
Obviously, you are not a FED official or coach.
|
And I wouldn't be, if this is their philosophy of administering a game!
Quote:
|
Under FED, an intentional walk does not require the pitcher to pitch. The defense can simply "put 'em on". The offense is still required to run the bases properly. This is not so hard to understand.
|
No, but what's hard to understand is how R2 gained an unfair advantage by walking directly to 2B, or how the game is served by allowing the obvious lack of touching 1B to be appealed.
Quote:
|
In the OP, if the defense put on the runners one at a time and not at the same time, they could have had the out.
|
Are you saying the U deprived them of a chance at a play by acceding to their request to put both runners on base? As if a pitcher who wanted to walk 2 batters was thinking about picking the first one off?
What's the whole point of appeals? It's to prevent the offense from gaining an unfair advantage while
running the bases. There is no athleticism or great skill involved in walking to 2B. If the U erred in allowing the runner to be in that position, then that's how it should stand. Is there no such thing as preventive officiating in baseball?
Robert