[tcarilli]

I have thought a lot about this issue in this thread. I joined this thread because this is a very nuanced play with lots of implications. I joined this thread because, I don't know the proper ruling in this case. I am trying to work through the issues with the rule book with peers. Much the same way peer reviewed research is done in academics. It's easy to be right when we don't allow our thoughts to be seen in the light of day. We can't be the emperor with no clothes.

Those who are disagreeing with the judgment on the call, that's fine. Those that are therefore implying that the umpire is in some ways incompetent, that's not fair.

Those that think, they know what Augie Garrido said to the plate umpire, you are only concluding what you think he may have said. Garrido did not come out right away. They were about to begin play again, before the round of discussions began.

While thinking about this post, I decided to look up this

Batter Becomes Base Runner
SECTION 2. The batter becomes a base runner:
b. Instantly after four balls have been called by the umpire;

Does this imply that the batter remains the batter until the umpire confirms the pitch is ball four? If so, he can be guilty of interference. If not, he cannot be guilty of unintentional interference.

Did the rule makers word 8-2-b for the eventuality of this play or do they mean as soon as the pitch passes the hitter out of the strike zone or something else.

I don't think common sense and fair play would allow us to allow hitters to run out in front of catchers who are trying to make throws to retire runners that the can't know the status of until after they have thrown the ball.

I'm think I know where I stand on this one, but I'm still not sure. That is why discussion of rulings is important. Referring to judgments as boneheaded or an abortion or whatever will not move us closer to truth. I know for sure I have never missed one from my couch or behind the fence.