Unusual occurence in April 28th Baltimore-Cleveland game

[kylejt]

Originally Posted by GarthB

If that were the case, they would not have sent Miller in to check the rulebook. Nice try, though. You are determined to turn a rules misapplication into a judgment call.

It's a simple FU, they incorrectly ruled the run couldn't score on the appeal play, treating it as a force.

I'm not really that determined, just promoting one side of the debate. I'm really not sure what they were consulting the rulebook over. I'd doubt they were going over the original play, rather, trying to figure out how on earth to sneak that run in without a protest. Didn't work, I guess.

It will be interesting to see how the protest gets turned down though. Has Marv owned up to this FU yet?

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by kylejt

I'm not really that determined, just promoting one side of the debate. I'm really not sure what they were consulting the rulebook over. I'd doubt they were going over the original play, rather, trying to figure out how on earth to sneak that run in without a protest. Didn't work, I guess.

It will be interesting to see how the protest gets turned down though. Has Marv owned up to this FU yet?

Let's reveiw what Ed said: "We kicked it around and now I'm having a brain cramp on it," Montague said. "So I sent Bill (umpire Bill Miller) in, I said 'You know what, cause we're debating, you go in. Lets make it 100 percent sure."'

"Miller checked the rule and said the run should have counted."

I don't know how you can read it any other way...rule misapplication...plain and simple.