FED test

[ManInBlue]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Typo or some confusion on what the question actually said.

No confusion on what the question actually said. We talked about it for 5 minutes, broke it down etc. We KNEW what the quesiton said.

I think the problem is that the infraction as stated in the rule book is "intentionally pitch close to a batter." Then there's the gobble-d-gook about intent and warnings etc in the penalty. If you take the 100,000 foot view - it says intentionally pitching close to a batter is illegal and you can do a couple of things if and when it happens. There is no shall until you get down to a closer vantage point.

The problem is that the rule should state that the illegal act is pitching close to a batter, since intent is left up to me...however the rule states "intentional" then the penalty states that "if we judge it intentional"...

long and short - we have options - and apparently we read the question too closely.