|
As I posted on a different board, Greymule, you have to be careful in reading The BRD and differentiating author opinion from fact.
That is, while the author reports Official interpretation 13-12 provided by the PBUC and Official Interpretation 136-238 from Fitzpatrick (PBUC), he doesn't report that the play you reference (Play 14-12) nor its ruling has been confirmed by the PBUC. That is, the play appears designed by the author, not the PBUC. Since it's not reported that the PBUC blessed it, I'd not accept its ruling since the ruling of the play is in contradiction to Official Interpretation 136-238 as reported by The BRD.
Until this play is blessed by the PBUC (which perhaps might someday be reported), it appears to me as nothing more than another error within The BRD. It's not the first, and likely not the last [check section 350...LOL].
While The BRD remains an excellent source for highlighting differences between various sets of rules, the readers should be cautious of author interpretations sometimes well hidden within the book and which, at times, may be difficult to differentiate from baseball fact.
Just my opinion,
Freix
|