|
It's not so much a question of "movement and intent" not being in the rule as it is what factors we use to judge where the runner would have been without the obstruction.
I agree it's pretty simple, but we tend to get overly analytical about certain rules. Without criticizing or insulting anyone on this forum, do I dare say those rules are the ones that umpires in general are inconsistent about or which certain umpires feel guilty about or especially those that have related myths. The inconsistency I refer to is from one umpire to another, not between the calls of an individual umpire.
|