Quote:
Originally Posted by MrUmpire
Again, according to McClelland, the crew's interpretation is that the requirement of the pitcher to pitch to the current batter comes into play when the manager ignores the warning. They did not believe the manager ignored a proper warning. Thus they did not require Broxton to pitch.
And again, you may disagree with their interpretation..their supervisor did...however they continue to maintain their interpretationis correct.
They knew the rule. Once again, you may disagree with their interpretation of enforcement for that situation, but they knew the rule and chose that enforcement for that situation.
|
I have not heard that they said that. if they did, that's even worse. It does not make any sense at all that whether the manager ignores the warning or not would have any effect on which pitcher is required to pitch. If they really said that - I seriously question their abilities to digest the rules. That's not what the rule says, nor could it be stretched to mean what you say they said. I don't buy it.
Fri Jul 23, 2010, 05:05pm
Threaded Mode
