View Single Post
  #32 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jun 04, 2012, 09:36am
MD Longhorn MD Longhorn is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by luvthegame View Post
The NCAA Rules Interpreter is in attendance at the WCWS. This rule...which, because of the sit at UA, apparently was discussed. The rule (as currently written) has an affect and penalty. The umpires "huddled" together, as I understand it, to make sure they were on the same page as to the affect on this play. They agreed, and when it was explained it to the coaches, neither coach objected because they knew the rule.

Regardless of how much we may conject, opine, pontificate, object or project (ie...future actions by the defense) the rule was administered correctly!

There is one opinion that matters....and is the final determinate...

And it is not yours or mine!!

The umpires made the correct call at UA and in this case!!

Whether our opinion differs or not!!

Kudo's to them!!
If you are saying they administered the rule correctly, you are right. However, the JUDGEMENT that this (and the 1st one) was interference is blatantly horrific. If their legitimate judgement is that these runners interfered, they their judgement is so poor that they don't belong on the field - at ANY level.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote