View Single Post
  #48 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 08, 2015, 12:43pm
Manny A Manny A is offline
Stirrer of the Pot
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Lowcountry, SC
Posts: 2,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA View Post
I didn't. I was referring to your alteration of the discussion.



I don't like wasting teaching moments. The rule was changed and as much as 8.7.Q has been mentioned on other threads on this and other boards, not once have I seen this change mentioned. So I decided to push a few buttons to get a conversation about it going. I went out of my way to lock the scenario so tight there was no room for multiple conclusions. Yet, there were and achieved by basically ignoring the parameters of the play to suit a predetermined response.

It is a frustration of many in clinics, schools and social media outlets. How can anyone know what is or is not when there is so much static and people looking for loopholes in a rule that the original question is contorted almost to the point of obliteration?
For the record, I wasn't looking for a loophole to allow the runner to be free of any interference call here. He/she needs to be ruled out, and I was looking for something to support it.

As for 8-7-Q, I did want to use that, but I always believed (perhaps wrongly) that this specific rule was meant to deal with the situation that RS#13 expands upon, and that's when the fielder is waiting to make a tag. That's why I was looking for some alternative involving a deflected ball.
__________________
"Let's face it. Umpiring is not an easy or happy way to make a living. In the abuse they suffer, and the pay they get for it, you see an imbalance that can only be explained by their need to stay close to a game they can't resist." -- Bob Uecker
Reply With Quote