OBR rewrite?

Patrick Szalapski · #1 (**permalink**) Mon Apr 09, 2001, 05:45pm

In yet another violation of OBR 1.04 NOTE, PNC Park in Pittsburgh opened today with a distance of 320 feet to the right field wall.

We could really use an OBR rewrite, as the authority of pure OBR went down the tubes a long time ago. I'm thinking it will be pushed back at least another year because of labor conflicts this offseason. Maybe in 2003 we'll have it.

P-Sz

Mike M · #2 (**permalink**) Tue Apr 10, 2001, 10:22am

I am missing something? Rule 1.04 indicates that a distance to the nearest fence on fair territory shall be 250 feet ... 320 feet along the foul lines is preferable. It appears PNC park is using the preferred minimum of 320 feet. Everything seems fine to me.

Rich · #3 (**permalink**) Tue Apr 10, 2001, 11:11am

The OBR rewrite will be a disaster for two reasons.

(1) The umpires will have to relearn where everything is, unless the writers are very careful to take all the sources of authoritative opinion and structure the book the same way as before.

(2) There will be new loopholes created unintentionally. Then, will we use the OLD sources and rulebook as AO?

I don't know why they just don't leave it as it is and incorporate the NAPBL manual and Evans and J/R and all that other stuff as case notes to the existing book.

Rich

Rich Ives · #4 (**permalink**) Tue Apr 10, 2001, 11:48am

Mike M: The note specifies that the minimum distance to a fence is 325 feet.

Mike M · #5 (**permalink**) Tue Apr 10, 2001, 01:26pm

Guess I have to learn to turn the page and read the whole rule. Another rookie mistake.

rex · #6 (**permalink**) Tue Apr 10, 2001, 02:03pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser
The OBR rewrite will be a disaster for two reasons.

(1) The umpires will have to relearn where everything is, unless the writers are very careful to take all the sources of authoritative opinion and structure the book the same way as before.

(2) There will be new loopholes created unintentionally. Then, will we use the OLD sources and rulebook as AO?

I don't know why they just don't leave it as it is and incorporate the NAPBL manual and Evans and J/R and all that other stuff as case notes to the existing book.

Rich

Rich,

I don't think they will rewrite the OBR (Players union has too much to say about it) IMHO it will be a reorganization of the rules and a clean up of mistakes. As you know there are a bunch of them. One such rule would be to put 4.09 where it belongs with runner responsibility. As far as umpires having to relearn, again IMHO the rules would be much easier to follow if they weren't spread out as random thoughts.

Yikes what means Yikes?

rex