![]() |
|
|||
|
greymule,
I am reasonably certain that, other than in FED, if the defense properly appeals the BOOT, any outs made on the play are nullified. This is what the MLBUM says in the section on BOOT: Quote:
I believe the rule "means" what mbyron suggests in his post above. You will observe that the "6.07(b) Note" giving examples of advances that would stand ONLY includes things that could happen while the improper batter remains a batter. The text of 6.07 that talks about advances that are to be nullified I believe is meant to be an exhaustive list of ALL the ways a batter might possibly complete his at bat ("or otherwise" makes it comprehensive - I can only come up with U3K & CI as the only two things covered by "or otherwise") rather than a suggestion that the umpire judge whether the "batter's action" caused the advance or the runner advanced for some "other" reason. To me that is the interpretation most consistent with the text of the rules and the collective interpretation manuals. JM
__________________
Finally, be courteous, impartial and firm, and so compel respect from all. |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Continuous action? | umpjim | Baseball | 29 | Sat Nov 07, 2009 08:25pm |
| Continuous motion? | Scrapper1 | Basketball | 19 | Wed Oct 01, 2008 07:18pm |
| "Continuous Action"? | Yeggman | Softball | 6 | Wed Dec 14, 2005 08:52am |
| Continuous Motion | ronny mulkey | Basketball | 20 | Sun Dec 28, 2003 03:01pm |
| continuous motion | Ralph Stubenthal | Basketball | 1 | Thu Nov 01, 2001 09:48pm |