Quote:
Originally Posted by KJUmp
Because, as I said in my previous post, I can't find definitive rule support in the book or in any of Dee's interpretations.
|
I'm trying not to be obtuse here... but what do you need rule support for? The rule clearly says to do 3 things. You're stopping at 2 for no apparent reason. When the rule says to do 3 things, you don't need rule support to not stop at 2... the rule IS the rule support.
1 - ball is dead.
2 - batter-runner is out.
Now we're at 3, with a runner on third that in our own judgement would have scored had there been no interference. There is only one remaining "offended" (Yes, I hate that word here) party; only one remaining player on the field that was hurt by the ball being declared dead. That would be the runner at 3rd.
The first half of the rule states what to do when the ball is interfered with by a spectator but not caught. It says to place runners where they would have gotten to without the interference. The second half of the rule is not to contradict that, but rather to give us solid rule support to rule an out on the batter-runner, and still allow us to clear the rest of the damage.