BRD on lodged batted ball

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by GarthB
Are you saying that the BRD does indeed include actual intrepretations in addition to the non interpretation descriptions of language? And if that is the case, how are the two differentiated. (I'm sorry, but my copies of the BRD only go to 2001, perhaps this is all handled differently in the newer editions.)

What I'm saying: I wonder if the Red Sox are ever going to lose a game.

You know exactly what I mean, and you are fooling not one soul on this Board who knows anything about your "history."

Read the introduction to the BRD, even in your antiquated edition. When I "interpret" a rule, I say so.

And you know that. As does everyone who owns a copy of the BRD.

Knock yourself out -- solo.

I'm just amazed it took me so long to figure out you weren't seriously interested in advancing your "knowledge" of the FED.

Stupid.

[Edited by Carl Childress on Sep 3rd, 2004 at 06:44 PM]