Baltimore vs Boston

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by Rich Ives
So what about: The 2004 BRD OFF INTERP 176-272 FITZPATRICK: (3) "The throw need not come from behind."

Rich: As I pointed out in the 2003 edition of the BRD: Of all the interpretations I've received down through the years from Mike Fitzpatrick, [this] OFF INTERP [176-272] surprised me the most. (1) I have never seen running lane interference called other than when the throw came from behind the batter-runner, screening the fielder at first. (2) It is difficult for me to understand how a runner safe on the base can be guilty of interference for being out of the lane: He doesn't have to be in the lane if he's on the base.

But though I don't agree [with] Fitzpatrick's ruling, it is official; it is how I will treach the running lane in my clinics. An abiding precept -- and one I've always umpired by -- is: A single officials interpretations is worth any number of authoritative opinions.

What I'm trying to say is: Joe Morgan is right, Mike Fitzpatrick is wrong. Still, the BRD accepts his word as The Law. Ah, well, you know what I'm saying....