Strange, almost troll like, situation

[UMP25]

I shouldn't have used the word "adopt" when referring to OBR looking to NFHS; rather, it would have been more correct to say that there are a few things OBR does not clearly state and that an NFHS or NCAA interp. would be followed.

Also, I am aware that the line to which I referred above is beyond the diagonal. I explained this in my post above when I mentioned the diagonal is roughly 64' away.

Anyway, I did some thorough searching about this diagonal line issue, since I know I read it somewhere. Indeed, it was in an Email reply to me from Rick Roder (he was one of the classroom instructors at school the year I attended). I had Emailed Rick a question about this since it came up elsewhere. His explanation, to paraphrase him, was that if a ball should go past "a line drawn between first and third base" and somehow end up foul, it would be a fair ball because it did, in fact, pass first or third, just in a different geometrical manner, so to speak. I was the one who brought up this "diagonal" to him, asking him if he had heard of it; hence his reply back to me explaining that that was, in fact, the interpretation under OBR.

[greymule]

Well, UMP25, if Roder told you that, then that's certainly evidence that you are correct. I'm surprised that Rick hasn't included his interpretation in his publications.

Since (amazingly) no one but you and me has contributed to this thread in a while, I'm going to try to get a definitive answer from MLB.

[UMP25]

Well, in his defense, there are a lot of "little things" that aren't included in the J/R manual. I don't remember exactly what every little thing is right now, but I had a few questions for him last year when I was asking him about the J/R electronic version for the classroom, and the questions I asked him dealt with ambiguities not mentioned in the J/R manual. He was kind enough to address what I asked.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by UMP25

I shouldn't have used the word "adopt" when referring to OBR looking to NFHS; rather, it would have been more correct to say that there are a few things OBR does not clearly state and that an NFHS or NCAA interp. would be followed.

Are you referring to the umpire's authority under 9.01(c)?

If not, could you provide an approved example?

[UMP25]

I don't know if I'd label it "approved." My point in this thread is this: there are times when OBR doesn't address something, and the publication that discusses it often says something like "no official interpretation given--follow NFHS/NCAA."

This doesn't mean that OBR says it's supposed to follow NFHS or NCAA; rather, using some common sense, the ruling in NFHS or NCAA would also be the same thing that OBR follows.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by UMP25

I don't know if I'd label it "approved." My point in this thread is this: there are times when OBR doesn't address something, and the publication that discusses it often says something like "no official interpretation given--follow NFHS/NCAA."

This doesn't mean that OBR says it's supposed to follow NFHS or NCAA; rather, using some common sense, the ruling in NFHS or NCAA would also be the same thing that OBR follows.

Ahhh. So you are referencing the "BRD" and not OBR?"

[UMP25]

Among other sources, yeah. I read so many of these d*mn publications every year I can't keep track of them all.

I just wanted to emphasize that the Official Baseball Rulebook doesn't specifically state to follow an NFHS or NCAA interp. However, it is accepted to do this in certain instances by what is explained in several sources.

[GarthB]

I have the utmost respect for Carl's work. My confusion was that you appeared to be saying that OBR approved of using FED interpretations. It does not. I doubt if you will find anyone in a position of authority with MLB who would say such a thing.

The BRD gives that advice to amateur umpires when working under OBR and faced with such situations.

[UMP25]

Originally Posted by GarthB

My confusion was that you appeared to be saying that OBR approved of using FED interpretations.

I'm smart enough to know this isn't the case at all.