gotblue?,

OK. The kid goofed. He apologized - twice. He may have actually gone & read the rule (and the post, apparently). Regardless, he appears to have learned the rule.

Let's give him an iota of credit for bothering and move along.

JM

Sorry, JM, but I still do not see evidence of a recognition by boyinblue24 that a "foul tip" is, by definition, a ball that is caught by the catcher, and that a "foul ball", or any other ball not caught by the catcher, is something different entirely.

He stated that a "foul tip" cannot be strike three, and then said that he misread (overlooked?) the post that stated that the ball was caught by the catcher, which caused him to change his mind about whether strike three could be called. So I am thinking that he still thinks that a "foul tip" is something that might or might not be caught by the catcher, and would be strike three only if it is caught by the catcher. Whereas I am trying to clarify to him that it is not a "foul tip" in the first instance if it is not caught by the catcher.

If I have "misread" the string of posts, then I apologize for dragging this out. Then again, BIB24 could possibly share the blame by not writing with sufficient clarity for all of us to understand.

gotblue?,

You may well be correct.

Personally, I think people would take LittleBoyBlue more seriously if he took himself a little more seriously. You know, thought about what he'd said for a sec. before hitting "submit"; maybe checked, or phrased it as a question if he weren't sure.

We'll see.

JM