Hit by Pitch

[SanDiegoSteve]

Actually Tyler, everyone except you was already on the page. We just waited for you to catch up. You are still taxiing out to the runway, nowhere near ready for takeoff.

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Would that be if the batter intentionally allows or causes the pitch to hit him?

Not quite everyone.

Oh, the Humanity...............

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

I've never heard of "non consecutive" runners. Might be confusing for some. Hopefully everyone, including you, are on the same page now.......

Then by all means let me explain. Non-consecutive runners would be runners not consecutively on base starting with R1, as in R1, R2, R3, for example. Or in terms you're more accustomed with; non-forced runners. It may not be written in a rule book this way, but common sense and a basic knowledge of English should have been enough for you to understand.


Tim.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

Not quite everyone.

Oh, the Humanity...............

I meant after Tim revealed the answer. We were all shooting down the runway in our respective Gulfstreams and Citation Xs ready to take off while you were in your Piper Cub taxiing out. Damn, this plane analogy is getting old.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Damn, this plane analogy is getting old.

Then, please, please, stop peeking at your ignore list and you won't have to watch the three crazy kamikazes crash and burn.

[UmpJM]

Hmmmm....

I've always found that the "peeking" is not the problem.

Failing to resist the urge to respond, on the other hand...

JMO.

JM

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I meant after Tim revealed the answer. We were all shooting down the runway in our respective Gulfstreams and Citation Xs ready to take off while you were in your Piper Cub taxiing out. Damn, this plane analogy is getting old.

Time revealed the answer unless all runners advance one base. Tell me when runners don't get to advance one base on a balk.

Now Steve, I knew the question to the answer. It was quite obvious in my post. Tim proposed the question, There's one other instance in baseball where a batter that's been HBP is not awarded first base, other than the reasons given in 6.08. Note the phrase other than the reason given in 6.08. What did you do. You gave a ruling found in 6.08.

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve
Would that be if the batter intentionally allows or causes the pitch to hit him?

Now I might be flying a Piper Cub, but it is all to obvious to most the rubber band broke on your aircraft a long time ago.....

[Dave Reed]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

Then by all means let me explain. Non-consecutive runners would be runners not consecutively on base starting with R1, as in R1, R2, R3, for example. Or in terms you're more accustomed with; non-forced runners. It may not be written in a rule book this way, but common sense and a basic knowledge of English should have been enough for you to understand.
Tim.

Jaksa/Roder define and employ the term "consecutive runner". A point of clarification: It is tempting to equate "consecutive runner" to "forced runner", but the two terms aren't quite the same. With R1 and R2, there are consecutive runners but, for example, in the event of an infield fly, they aren't forced runners.

Steven Tyler, why not replace some of the hours you spend posting here with earning the $50 to buy J/R-- and then follow up with the critical step: reading it?

[UmpLarryJohnson]

I'm plane tired of this thread!!

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by UmpLarryJohnson

I'm plane tired of this thread!!

*Groan*...that one crashed on takeoff.