View Single Post
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jul 30, 2010, 12:40pm
Big Slick Big Slick is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: PA
Posts: 537
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder View Post
I don't see these as equivalent at all. For many reasons. Really, not even similar. The first involved inadvertently continuing to play after a legitimate 3rd out. The one you posted, well, doesn't. At all.
One happened at the end of an inning, the other at the end of a game, both allowed play to happen that was not suppose to happen.

Quote:
In your sitch, the appeal never happened, and the umpires should never have gone back. Head Coach needed to appeal this while umpires were still on the field. I'm not sure I follow why B2 was called out anyway - probably a misunderstanding of what you wrote on my part though. But even if B2 should have been out, there are rules for appealing this - and those rules were not followed. (Not to mention that AC doesn't have the authority to do this anyway - assuming HC is still in the game).
The answer isn't about what is suppose to happen. Yes, the umpires should have denied the appeal and kept on walking. Then again, the OP, the umpires should not have allowed a team to bat with 3 outs. That's not my question, my question is "what's next?" In my scenario, they did play. What do you rule? Do you forget about play that happened after the "end" of the game or does the game have a new ending?
Reply With Quote