View Single Post
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 17, 2013, 10:56am
chapmaja chapmaja is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by CecilOne View Post
Probably, but the NFHS ruling is
"NHFS 9.1.1 does not include the verbiage about when the force is determined (time of infraction or time of appeal) and the casebook plays support the interp that since R3 was forced to 2B at the time she missed 2B this appeal is considered a force play and as the third out no runs score."
I think what the casebook does is stretch exception e under 9-1-1. When more than one out is declared by an umpire the defense may choose the out to which is gains th advantage. In this case I can see this exception being used to declare the order of outs which occured. In this case, even though the appeal of the B-R missing first was done first, followed by the out of R3 for missing second, the outs are really declared as R3 out first, then the B-R, both of which are considered force outs, and thus no runs score.

As I've said, the rules need to be clearer.

Personally I wish they would all go to 1 rule code and be done with it. To many rule codes just causes problems. It is the same with track and field and with swimming and diving, two other sports I work.
Reply With Quote