Quote:
Originally posted by cbfoulds
Quote:
Originally posted by JEL
Yep, you got the wrong one. Runner should have been out, batter could be called out also if action was deemed intentional.
|
Half right. With less than 2 out, R3 is out for the batter's interference; w/2 out, Batter is out & run doesn't score anyway. Since all INT w/ a THROWN ball has to be, on some level at least, intentional, no way do you get 2 outs on this one.
And, BTW, what was coach irate about? He kept his R3 in scoring position, at the cost of an out he was gonna take no matter what. Plus, it's not "even though" he got out of the BB, its' mainly because the batter DID get out of the BB [and in the process got in the way] that we have INT.
[Edited by cbfoulds on Sep 18th, 2004 at 09:35 PM]
|
Half Right? Which half was wrong?
Post stated 1 out, there was a violation of NFHS 7.3.5.b. Penalty for Art. 5 states batter is out, and states further; "If the pitch is a third strike and in the umpires judgement interefernce prevents a possible double play (additional outs), two may be ruled out."
"batter could also be ruled out if action was deemed intentional"
This batter could (even standing still) intentionally interfere, thus creating a second out.
Sat Sep 18, 2004, 11:21pm
Threaded Mode
