whats the rulebook say

[SAump]

Originally Posted by NFump

The dolt is the one who doesn't know that the defense obstructs and the offense interferes. B...bb...bbbut....it...sss..sssays ob..ob...obstructs in the definition....whaaaaa....whaaaaaaa. He's stalking me....whaaaaaaa!

What was the latest on NOT allowing the catcher to block the plate without the ball?
I guess it going to take some serious bat throwing incidents to move you guys.
Local leagues will adopt the changes after word gets OUT.
Good thing you keep UP with the rule changes.

[NFump]

Originally Posted by SAump

What was the latest on NOT allowing the catcher to block the plate without the ball?
I guess it going to take some serious bat throwing incidents to move you guys.
Local leagues will adopt the changes after word gets OUT.
Good thing you keep UP with the rule changes.

What? Now the catcher is blocking the plate without the ball. Serious bat throwing warrants an ejection not an out! Really SA, you're going from the sublime to the ridiculous to the absolutely absurd. Flailing, flailing on the baseball field. Good job! ROFLMAO!!

SAump Quote:

Originally Posted by BigUmp56
It wouldn't matter at all even if there were a runner trying to advance. You still cannot get an out here for contact made on the backswing unless it was an intentional act.

6.06(c)

If a batter strikes at a ball and misses and swings so hard he carries the bat all the way around and, in the umpire's judgment, unintentionally hits the catcher or the ball in back of him on the backswing before the catcher has securely held the ball, it shall be called a strike only (not interference). The ball will be dead, however, and no runner shall advance on the play.

Tim.

You cite a rule that confirms my observation. Do you have your sites on twisting these words around too. Remember to place the runners back to TOP and NO they can't score a RUN in this manner, either.

Didn't I cite this to you earlier in this thread? Talk about not reading the whole thread. This cite is closer to what actually happened but still doesn't apply. Did you fall down and hit your head? Maybe it's the psychotropic drugs your therapist is prescribing for you. You really shouldn't abuse those you know.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by NFump

Didn't I cite this to you earlier in this thread? Talk about not reading the whole thread. This cite is closer to what actually happened but still doesn't apply. Did you fall down and hit your head? Maybe it's the psychotropic drugs your therapist is prescribing for you. You really shouldn't abuse those you know.

I never never discussed backswing in the first seven pages. Let me know when the word backswing first appeared by posting the thread number 124. This thread was never about backswing. I also immediately posted, "I have been wrong all along about backswing" in thread #125. Keep twisting it for all you have afterwards. You brought it UP and NOW the 3 pretenders twist it as if I am the ONE defending IT. What a great show. LOL

To my knowledge, you have not cited an original rule, except the shortsighted mistake you made repeatedly earlier in this thread. I will gladly RE-post your mistake below.
----
"6.05 A batter is out when: (h) After hitting or bunting a fair ball, his bat hits the ball a second time in fair territory....etc, etc. This doesn't have anything to do with the original sitch. Wrong rule cite."
----
Please post the thread number where you cited any other rule. You also cited a quote from the LL UIC (AK). Let me clarify,
----
"There is no rule that allows an umpire to call a batter out for throwing the bat, under any circumstances (even if intentional)."
----
Well, are you going to pretend the following rule doesn't exist in OBR, 6.00 - The Batter?
----
"If a whole bat is thrown into fair territory and interferes with a defensive player attempting to make a play, interference shall be called, whether intentional or not. "
----
Better get AK on the phone and let him know about the rule! It a shame when th LL UIC doesn't realize whatever the hell he's talking about. I already know what you have to say for AK. I made this up with a wrong rule cite. The catcher isn't part of the ensuing play at the plate while the baserunner strolls to 3B. YADA YADA YADA.

[NFump]

Originally Posted by SAump

I never never discussed backswing in the first seven pages. Let me know when the word backswing first appeared by posting the thread number 124. This thread was never about backswing. I also immediately posted, "I have been wrong all along about backswing" in thread #125. Keep twisting it for all you have afterwards. You brought it UP and NOW the 3 pretenders twist it as if I am the ONE defending IT. What a great show. LOL

You didn't? Hmmmm...post #4 by gulf breeze when he clarified his original post. Then YOU in post #5 asked "A) While hitting the catcher on the back swing, the batter was still holding onto the bat in the back of the batter's box.
or
B) While releasing the bat after the swing, the bat flew backward and hit the catcher after being tossed by the batter as the batter began to run to first base."

To my knowledge, you have not cited an original rule, except the shortsighted mistake you made repeatedly earlier in this thread. I will gladly RE-post your mistake below.
----
"6.05 A batter is out when: (h) After hitting or bunting a fair ball, his bat hits the ball a second time in fair territory....etc, etc. This doesn't have anything to do with the original sitch. Wrong rule cite."

It is the wrong rule cite. The bat (whole or not) was not thrown into fair territory nor did it interfere with a player making a play. This by your own admission.
----
Please post the thread number where you cited any other rule. You also cited a quote from the LL UIC (AK). Let me clarify,
----
"There is no rule that allows an umpire to call a batter out for throwing the bat, under any circumstances (even if intentional)."

Yep and by your own admission there isn't any such rule. Remember? You said to use 9.01c.
----
Well, are you going to pretend the following rule doesn't exist in OBR, 6.00 - The Batter?

???
----
"If a whole bat is thrown into fair territory and interferes with a defensive player attempting to make a play, interference shall be called, whether intentional or not. "

Already went over this. WRONG RULE CITE!!!!
----
Better get AK on the phone and let him know about the rule! It a shame when th LL UIC doesn't realize whatever the hell he's talking about. I already know what you have to say for AK. I made this up with a wrong rule cite. The catcher isn't part of the ensuing play at the plate while the baserunner strolls to 3B. YADA YADA YADA.

I knew you'd see the light. Now YOU'RE finally GETTING it.

[NFump]

SAump: "In my judgement, you have the best little graphic guys on this forum. They kill me, especially around Cinco de MAYO.

I would love BC to post the WAAMbulence again for my little friend, NFump.
But that wasn't part of the original sitch either. I know, "Wrong Site.""

And you're my tiny friend SAump.