Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn
...this might be ruleset specific... where are those books now....  |
yep. When I'm interpreting from memory on a non-ruleset-specific play, FED is my last source. So, apologies to those I said were "wrong"; we're just coming from different places.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dash_riprock
Jim has the wrong guy out as well. Typo?
|
I didn't make a typo; I typed exactly what I intended. I was just careless and wrong. I know who is supposed to be called out, as evidenced by post #29.
I'm not sure what Paronto's excuse is.
In the R1, R3 play I gave, I learned that when determining whether R1 advanced because of the BB or because of the WP, go with the BB (and bring R1 back) because it doesn't require any conjecture. It sounds like Paronto might want a more nuanced approach. That is, if R3 scored, it is safe to assume that R1 would have advanced irrespective of the pitch being ball four (leave R1 at 2nd). I'll have to get that clarified.