The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Thu Nov 12, 2009, 09:56pm
DG DG is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,022
UMPJM

Why did you ask the original question since you have BRD in hand with a 1999 interpretation?

It is not uncommon for FED to issue an interpretation that never shows up in Case Book, such as this one, from 1999 (gorilla arm another example). It was not long ago that the state made this is a point for discussion at state meeting, apparently unaware of 1999 FED interpretation, that essentially, they really did not mean it when the rule was put in the book.

To answer your very hypothetical question, in the very unlikely event that I was presented with baseballs that did not meet the rule, I would advise the coach that legal baseballs need to be used, and if none were available on site, we would discuss at the plate meeting and both coaches would recognize that official baseballs were not being used, and both were agreeable to their use before we would play the game. Afterwards I would report this to my assignor.
 

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ABC's "Nightline" examines "worst calls ever" tonight pizanno Basketball 27 Fri Jul 04, 2008 06:08am
"Hideout" Play--Legal or Not? reff4e Football 10 Mon Nov 26, 2007 08:28pm
New "AP Legal Touch" Rule/Different Interpretation BayStateRef Basketball 142 Wed Jul 18, 2007 10:53pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:31pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1