Quote:
Originally Posted by jicecone
Wellllllllll, lets see here. how about the umpire stated that he determined what the intent of the runners was, to get the pitcher to balk.
How is it different? Let see here!!!! One is a rule violation the other is not.
The fragility of the players has NOTHING to do with this. Were talking about an officials ability to recognize a rule violation and enforce it, (when it is necessary).
|
Okay, since your hands are already covered from the s---ty end of the stick (hope you wore gloves!), let me ask this:
In Fed, a pitcher can't pickoff from the windup. So, a lot of times, R3 will take off way down the line from third and bluff a steal. Why? To distract the pitcher - and
maybe to get the pitcher to balk. You calling that, too?? Do you think the two things are equal, and do you can them the same?
And back to my other comment: when an infielder is tapping his glove behind the runner, one can make the argument he's hindering the runner, since that runner may take a smaller lead, or be going the wrong way when the pitch is delivered. So that could be called a rules violation, too. (I know: the runner should be listening to a coach. And whatever pitcher is bothered by The Clapper should be worrying about pitching, too.)
What I'm saying is: don't extend every little thing that happens on the field into something to be ruled upon. Some parts of the game
can go on without us. Or they'll be policed by the players. And my disagreement with you is that the umpire in question determined this was an attempt to draw a balk, and warranted a warning, and you agree with that; I don't. Therefore, I disagree it's a rule violation.