Catcher not returning ball to pitcher

[topper]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Maybe because they know it is not an IP

6-7.b and effect begs to differ, but that's really just splitting hairs. Do you have any idea as to why the seemingly one-sided rule is used?

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by topper

6-7.b and effect begs to differ, but that's really just splitting hairs. Do you have any idea as to why the seemingly one-sided rule is used?

Look guy, one day a bunch of dudes sat around with iced tap water, cute matching shirts, and old coffee and talked about rules and they passed some rules and those are the rules. Some you agree with, some you dont. We do our job.

WTF over?

[topper]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

Look guy, one day a bunch of dudes sat around with iced tap water, cute matching shirts, and old coffee and talked about rules and they passed some rules and those are the rules. Some you agree with, some you dont. We do our job.

WTF over?

It's a harmless question "guy". If this is the best answer you can fashion, maybe you should read more and type less.

[bkbjones]

Originally Posted by topper

It's a harmless question "guy". If this is the best answer you can fashion, maybe you should read more and type less.

Ya know, I think I will do the same. Not hard to delete posts, not that they would be missed. Ciao!

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by topper

It's a harmless question "guy". If this is the best answer you can fashion, maybe you should read more and type less.

HA! Says the guy who didnt read the rule book before he posted the question.

[topper]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

HA! Says the guy who didnt read the rule book before he posted the question.

Whatever.

Let's start over.

Why would any code punish the defense and not the offense for a similar act such as this.

[MichaelVA2000]

Originally Posted by topper

Whatever.

Let's start over.

Why would any code punish the defense and not the offense for a similar act such as this.

F2 not returning the ball to F1 is punished for delaying the game and a ball is awarded the batter. A similiar act by the offense could be a batter not entering the batter's box in the allowed time and the strike being added to the count as punishment.

[SRW]

Originally Posted by topper

Why would any code punish the defense and not the offense for a similar act such as this.

Obviously the acts you are trying to compare are not so similiar. If they were, they would be "punished" in similiar manners, as you are inferring. Perhaps you should re-think your question based on this, and what others have already posted.

[topper]

Originally Posted by SRW

Obviously the acts you are trying to compare are not so similiar. If they were, they would be "punished" in similiar manners, as you are inferring. Perhaps you should re-think your question based on this, and what others have already posted.

Thanks AtlUmpSteve for answering my 1st question.

It's not that obvious that, setting Steve's situation aside, 2 players inadvertently losing the count and delaying the game is not similar. It seems that there is more onus placed on the defense to keep track of the count than the offense. JMO

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by topper

6-7.b and effect begs to differ, but that's really just splitting hairs. Do you have any idea as to why the seemingly one-sided rule is used?

It is not splitting hairs, it is you not reading the Effect below 6.8

It reads EFFECT - Sections 1-5, 7A and 8:

You might notice that this does not include 6.7.B

[topper]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

It is not splitting hairs, it is you not reading the Effect below 6.8

It reads EFFECT - Sections 1-5, 7A and 8:

You might notice that this does not include 6.7.B

My mistake. The rule book next to my computer is from '05 and says EFFECT - Sections 1-8. Sorry.

My other question still stands.