Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA
Well, you are going to lose that protest.
|
This is not a win or lose issue, but attempting to understand and apply the rule book.
On this particular situation, there are rules sited justifying an out for interference.
Rule 8
Section 2. BATTER-RUNNER IS OUT.
F. When the batter-runner interferes with:
3. a thrown ball while out of the batter’s box
also the rule book states in Rule 8 Section 2
E. When the batter-runner runs outside the three-foot lane and, in the umpire’s judgment, interferes with the fielder taking the throw at first base; however, the batter-runner may run outside the three-foot lane to avoid a fielder attempting to field a batted ball.
When the defensive player uses the colored portion of the double base, the batter-runner can run in fair territory when the throw is coming from the foul side of first base, and if hit by the thrown ball, it is not interference. If intentional interference is ruled, the runner is out.
This maybe more of the problem as this is the rule sited in the CASE BOOK indicating that there is NO INTERFERENCE but there is a problem. As in this particular play, the throw is NOT coming from the foul side of first base.
What I am looking for is just what rule, exception or effect in the rule book that would take precedence and be applied over the Rule 8.2.F.3 sited above? (which I never seem to get an answer no matter where or whom I ask)
It is not that I am disagreeing with anyone, it is that there does not seem to be a rule in the book to apply to defend not calling interference. (other than 'do we call interference on a Runner running for 1st to 2nd base and is hit with a thrown ball from behind')