About the 234 known OBR errors

[nopachunts]

Originally Posted by Larry1953

What if in both cases, that instead of tagging the runner, F6 tags the base while shouting "that's still a force!"? Hard to see how he could suppress the ingrained urge to tag the runner off the bag, but it would seem a proper way to negate the run.

F6 would get more credence if he/she told the BU the runner missed the base. Then the appeal would be apparent. BTW, no shouting needed.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Larry1953

What if in both cases, that instead of tagging the runner, F6 tags the base while shouting "that's still a force!"? Hard to see how he could suppress the ingrained urge to tag the runner off the bag, but it would seem a proper way to negate the run.

That's not a force because the runner is assumed to have touched the base unless / until there's an appeal.

And, the various answers to all these questions depends on whether you subscribe to J/R's interpretation.

I, for one, don't, in this instance.

[Larry1953]

Thanks, Bob. I think I've finally seen the light, at least as far as the J/R rationale goes. I think the scenario you described about the bobbled throw could quite possibly happen. It would be interesting to see what the on field call would be. I'm not quite sure how J/R can admit that the rules "theoretically" support the no run out call but then come up with an opposite interpretation. Rules aren't really a "theory" of anything. They are logical posits from which deductions can be made. Anyway, thanks for your replies, they were very helpful.

[SAump]

The force, catch or tag, was removed with a loud emphatic safe call at 2B.
The runner must be tagged out while off base.
No missed base appeal allowed.

OBR 7.08e, 7.08j and 4.09a

[Larry1953]

Originally Posted by SAump

The force, catch or tag, was removed with a loud emphatic safe call at 2B.
The runner must be tagged out while off base.
No missed base appeal allowed.

OBR 7.08e, 7.08j and 4.09a

That wasn't mentioned in either scenario. Umpires don't make a loud, emphatic safe call if the runner misses the base when a play is being made at that base, do they?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Larry1953

That wasn't mentioned in either scenario. Umpires don't make a loud, emphatic safe call if the runner misses the base when a play is being made at that base, do they?

No, they don't.

[Larry1953]

Another obvious rulebook error/inconsistency: Rule 1.04 where it specifies minimum distances of 325 down the lines and 400 to CF. I doubt there are more than 5 or 6 parks now that comply with that rule. Kinda stupid just to leave it in there for 50+ years when it never meant anything except maybe to slap Charlie Finley on the wrist.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Larry1953

Another obvious rulebook error/inconsistency: Rule 1.04 where it specifies minimum distances of 325 down the lines and 400 to CF. I doubt there are more than 5 or 6 parks now that comply with that rule.

Here are the facts:

Only one ballpark in MLB does not comply with the Left Field minimum distance, and that is Houston's Minute Maid Park, which is 315 down the LF line.

Only three ballparks in MLB do not comply with the Center Field minimum distance; Petco Park in San Diego (396), and both PNC Park in Pittsburgh and AT&T Park in San Francisco (399). That is pretty close...well within tolerances.

Only three ballparks in MLB do not comply with the Right Field minimum distance; Petco Park again (322, which is like 350 in other parks, as the ball does not carry), Camden Yards in Baltimore (318), and PNC Park (320).

The distances stated in 1.04 of the rule book are there for guidelines, and not as a hard and fast rule that requires enforcement. Ballparks must be configured based on space availability and the fit with its surroundings.

[Altor]

Fenway is officially 310 to the Monster, 390 to straightaway center (420 to the deepest part of the Triangle), and 302 to Pesky's pole. There are some that question the "official" measurements down the lines, though.

[Larry1953]

The rule said something about no park built after 1957 or so could have less than the specified dimensions. The new Yankee Stadium does not comply nor does the atrocity in Tampa. Fenway was obviously waived dating as it does back to 1912. I am not certain of the date Charles Finley pulled his stunt of having a right field fence on wheel to mock the short porch in RF. The point is that the rule was very specific as in NO STADIUM, etc, etc when it could have said "any stadium built or modified after 1957 must have the dimensions approved by MLB". Obviously that rule was followed with the boring wave of symmetric cookie cutter stadiums from the 60's: Shea, Busch, Astrodome, the Vet, Fulton Co, Three Rivers, Riverfront, et al. But the fact remains that many of the new parks with retro-quirkiness do not comply with a strict reading of the plain English of the rule.

[Larry1953]

The Baseball Guru - Fans Speak to Joe Mock, Ballpark Dimensions

This is a pretty good answer regarding the waiver of Rule 1.04. The year was actually 1958 and it was probably due to the 250 foot line at the LA Coliseum with the high screen that Wally Moon took advantage of with his "Moon Shots". The article said Cincy got a waiver, I am not sure if the Great American Ballpark was mentioned in the list. Not meaning to be argumentative, it's just that the rule brings up a lot of wonderful baseball history.

[Altor]

Originally Posted by Larry1953

The article said Cincy got a waiver, I am not sure if the Great American Ballpark was mentioned in the list.

Cincy's waiver was for the last year(s) of Riverfront Stadium/Cinergy Field. They took out the center field seats and moved the wall in to make room to build GABP. Part of the waiver was to put in a mini-Green Monster in center field.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Larry1953

The Baseball Guru - Fans Speak to Joe Mock, Ballpark Dimensions

This is a pretty good answer regarding the waiver of Rule 1.04. The year was actually 1958 and it was probably due to the 250 foot line at the LA Coliseum with the high screen that Wally Moon took advantage of with his "Moon Shots". The article said Cincy got a waiver, I am not sure if the Great American Ballpark was mentioned in the list. Not meaning to be argumentative, it's just that the rule brings up a lot of wonderful baseball history.

You are persistent....I'll give you that.

[UMP25]

My father would categorize this as a "WGAS" type of discussion--Who Gives a S**t?

[yawetag]

Originally Posted by ump25

my father would categorize this as a "wgas" type of discussion--who gives a s**t? :d

dilligaf