View Single Post
  #48 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jun 11, 2009, 02:49pm
KWH KWH is offline
Small Business Owner
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Portland Oregon USA
Posts: 520
A little history

Waltjp-

Yes, that play was in the 2002 Case Book. However, the play was subsequently removed from the case book as it was incomplete.
Why? Simply because it did not specifiy what A1 did after he batted the ball. Because, if A1 returned inbounds after the "Legal bat," he would indeed have committed illegal participation. However, if A1 remained out of bounds after the "Legal bat" there is no rule book support for any foul being committed, as, again, for Illegal Participation to be committed, the PLAYER would have to "Return" inbounds.
Restated, there is no foul which prevents any PLAYER from going out of bounds and not returning. See 9-6-1 and 9-6-2
Additionally, 2-29-1 defines when a PLAYER is Out of Bounds. In the 2002 Case Play A1, was not, by definition, Out of Bounds, when he made the "Legal Bat"
__________________
"Knowledge is Good" - Emil Faber

Last edited by KWH; Thu Jun 11, 2009 at 03:01pm.
Reply With Quote