View Single Post
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 09, 2013, 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 Justme561 View Post
Ground ball to F6, throw to F3 pulls F3 off the bag towards the plate. Batter-Runner avoids contact and goes past 1B without touching the bag. The B-R was able to keep both feet in the running lane. The official ruled that there was no interference. F3 then walks over and touches the bag before the B-R can return. The B-R is called out. Non-verbal appeal & no tag needed.
First... the ruling seems correct, assuming the appeal was obvious to the umpire (and it seems like it's obvious to me, but we're not there).

Second ... what does "ruled there was no interference" mean? A) What interference could there have possibly been for him to rule on and B) what did the umpire do or say to make you think that was what he was ruling on?
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote