View Single Post
  #36 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 30, 2012, 11:52am
IRISHMAFIA IRISHMAFIA is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder View Post
By rule, this is nothing - I'm not arguing that.

But ... if I was the rules-writer, I would prefer this to be an out if it is INTENTIONALLY contacted in order to keep it foul, just as in the OP. The mind-reader argument is ridiculous ... this would not be the only time we are required to judge intent. I think we would all know it if we saw it (and I think that the vast majority of us would never see it).
You might want to read the entire response to Mr. West. The mind-reading referred directly to the point he failed to mention the second hit was with a bat.

The play and the judgment here isn't the player's actions, but a presumption we can tell the direction and distance the ball will roll. You want to talk about "what if" and TWP?
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote