Tue Jun 02, 2015, 12:31pm
|
Official Forum Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn
I will clarify.
First ... this came to me purportedly from Dee... but 2nd hand - so I cannot personally verify this was actually Dee's words.
Second - the PLATE never entered into this. If they are touching the plate, they are out - no dispute there.
Third - this had to do with a foot like the OP. Toes out of the box and on the ground; heel not out of the box, but also not on the ground. The (supposed?) interp was that this foot is not "ENTIRELY on the ground, COMPLETELY out of the box"... which are the words in the rulebook. (It was also noted that a foot with toes on the ground, heel up that was NOT over the box in any way was to be considered completely out of the box.)
I know that is not definitive, given that I cannot personally say this came directly to ME from Dee. I have had no reason to doubt this other person's veracity in the past, but want to make it clear I did not personally email the question to Dee, and did not personally see the response. But I hope this, at least, clarifies what, specifically, I was told.
And the post you replied to was intended to scoff at the ability of even the very best umpire on the planet to be able to A) track the pitch; B) see the foot in the position we're talking about at the moment of contact; and C) notice that the toe was down but the heel was up. A&B are exceedingly difficult by themselves and we don't guess outs... Adding C to the mix makes it (IMHO) ridiculous to think the PU could see it. From PU's viewpoint all he can really hope to see is that the heel blocks part of the line - so his assumption is going to be that it's touching the line. Especially in peripheral vision.
|
That's the kind of ridiculousness for which I would nod cooperatively, acknowledging the official interpretation, and then ignore.
__________________
Tom
|