New Divot

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by CoachJM

Uhhhh,

I understand there's an opening for a talented and upcoming canal in Nicaragua. Of course, in addition to having shown promise, you would also have to be willing to make some sacrifices and put in some long hard years in actually becoming a canal that could join two oceans.

JM

Oh, the horror that will be when the canals decide to strike. Is there an application form for those that would desire to cross the picket line?


Tim.

[Jurassic Referee]

I want to be a rising fastball when I grow up.

Makes as much sense as the rest of this thread........

[SAump]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

I want to be a rising fastball when I grow up.

Makes as much sense as the rest of this thread........

Know that USMC DS on tv? Read the following using his Semper Fi personna.

Do you wanna go through life being called Ball Hi, Jack?
Those MLB hitter's will just squat right under you or swat you OUT.
A caveman's 100 mph heater isn't good enuf to pitch through that stirke zone.
May have worked real good back then, but not in today's modern baseball.
Get a good downward spin on it and drop that rising fastball nonsense.

[SAump]

This is my thread and I'll post whatever I want on it too.

Behave, or I'll delete you.

[SAump]

Now that everyone took a little break to stretch their legs and get off a little steam; back to the subject of this baseball rule.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

FED 2.5.1E The batter hits the ball, drops the bat and it unintentionally hits the ball a second time in ... (c) fair territory and is either touched by a fielder and/or comes to rest in foul territory. Ruling: In ...(c) the ball is fair.

Yep .. and I think this is the "correct" ruling. But, until the FED removes / changes one case play or the other, then there is support to call it a fair ball, and I just meant to address CoahcJM's point that there was no FED interp that was the opposite of the OBR interp.

Sigh. Still a foul ball.

For one, the FOUL testing emperors can stop teasing the young FAIR socialites long enough to put on their robes. That foreign canal across the baseline can be placed there in any number of legal ways and all of which would suggest a FAIR BALL (play on no matter where the ball settles after) under FED 2.5.1E. Are we sure a bat is treated as a helmet and a helmet is treated as a pebble?

Something better be done to remove the doubt from both the FED and the OBR case rulings. Perhaps a better bridge to build a smaller gap in the same ole RULE inconsistency can be built. Perhaps dumming down the test and alerting everyone of the correct answer would work too. Only one is relevant to this thread and practical in application. That is FED 2.5.1F FAIR, their clothing or equipment, "attatched" or not.

I haven't had a weekend like this since the days WINDY use to drop in on us from time to time. Then he would have told me where I could find the simple rule. I may have not liked the way he told me, but he was always insistent upon telling me. Man, I miss WiNDY.

[umpduck11]

Originally Posted by SAump

This is my thread and I'll post whatever I want on it too.

Behave, or I'll delete you.

Makes me wish it was Tee's thread.