|
|
|
Sat Jan 29, 2005, 04:07pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
It seems that I remember a discussion on a very similar "zebra" (and I understant the reference) in which the advantageous 4th out was on the BR for failing to continue to 1st base after the 3rd out.
In that case the proper ruling was that the BR needed to touch 1st to prevent the appeal even though the 3rd out had been obtained elsewere. Therefore what would stop him from returning to 1st if he had advanced beyond it? Roger Greene 
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
