Quote:
Originally Posted by youngump
I understand what the book says. The problem here is that you have a league rule and it does change things. Whether it changes this or not is unspecified and I'm saying that as long as you have to make up the body of the rule, why not make it up in the most equitable fashion possible.
A solid argument might be made that we should be consistent with game ending procedures and I could respect that though I think it's less in line with how the game is actually played. The argument that the league rule can't change this rule but only other rules is somewhat lost on me though.
|
No one is saying that a league rule cannot supercede this. However, the OP makes absolutely no mention of that. (Again, no means no. None.) Barring that piece of evidence, we have to go with the book rule. And this book rule is as I have already stated.
Now, if the OP said that they "have a six run per inning rule, and that the runners who are forced to advance do not have to do so if the sixth run will score as a result of an award, and that no fourth out appeal, nor any other action by a player, coach or umpire can nullify a run once it has scored," I might be willing to entertain your argument. However, the OP never stated anything remotely close to that, and I am sure that no PARD director in their right mind (I know some who aren't) would ever make such a league rule.
You are really reaching here to defend an argument that has little to no merit and subsequently muddying the waters for those officials, players and coaches who might be reading this forum in hope of getting some concise answers.