Changing of wording on the Rules Myths thread

[TwoBits]

I don't want this to get lost in the physics discussion.

I have changed the wording on this myth:

· A runner is out if he runs out of the baseline to avoid a fielder who is fielding a batted ball. FALSE. The runner is required to avoid a fielder who is fielding a batted ball. If he/she does not avoid a fielder who is fielding a batted ball, he/she will be declared out. The runner is only ruled out for being out of the baseline when he/she is trying to avoid being tagged.

And added:

· A runner is out if he runs out of the baseline to avoid a fielder who is fielding a batted ball. FALSE. The runner is required to avoid a fielder who is fielding a batted ball. If he/she does not avoid a fielder who is fielding a batted ball, he/she will be declared out. The runner is only ruled out for being out of the baseline when he/she is trying to avoid being tagged. The runner’s baseline is established when the tag attempt occurs and is a straight line from the runner to the base he is attempting to reach safely. The baseline is not necessarily a straight line between two bases as some people assume.

The first new sentence is directly from OBR. The second new sentence is my wording. Does it make sense?

[mbyron]

Makes sense. In the last sentence I would change "not necessarily" to "not defined as," but that's just me. I'd also want a comma after "two bases" in that sentence.

[dash_riprock]

Make that a line between two consecutive bases..

[ljdave]

Twobits, I guess there will always be critics. As an umpire who's taken a decade off and just getting back into it this spring, I really appreciated your original post. Thanks......

Now, if only I could get a game that isn't RAINED OUT!!!