yeah, the loophole is there as explicitly written, so OP raises a valid point, which is really just a language issue.
mike is saying BR is awarded 1B regardless. so it doesn't matter, since it makes BR the a runner when placed on 1B by default.
steve is saying, the BR is a runner also in a sense, so BR doesn't need to ever reach 1B to be the second out.
I was suggesting another possible way to look at it, that BR reaches 1B after dead ball call because she is allowed to finish running responsibilities first before enforcement of the INT double play breakup. by doing so, I'm suggesting this might close up the language because it makes BR a runner if she reaches 1B safely. I can't see this being an issue in real play, unless BR pulls something silly like goto the dugout first. I guess anything can happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCASAUmp
Underneath 8-7-L:
I do not view this as a loophole. The rule does not say that it has to be a double play on a runner, only that it's an attempt to break up a double play. Since the BR is awarded 1B as per the quoted note above, they are now a runner, and are subject to the prescribed penalty.
For the record, I haven't been paying 100% attention to this thread. I think we're looking for a loophole that just isn't there.
|