Ball hits Bat

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

I also noticed where the runner was, part of how great Ruiz did was throwing over the runner w/o throwing over Howard.

I would give the ump the benefit of the doubt on a newspaper quote and assume the implication that he know there has to actually be a hindrance, like Howard not being able to catch the ball because of the runner in the way.

But why make any statement at all? We are talking about a professional sports official in MLB. He basically admitted he either failed to do his job or didn't have the nerve to make the call, but had no problem bragging about it after the fact. We really don't know since the call wasn't made when the INT occurred.

Of course, we don't need misstatements of the rules to further mislead the public and players; but that would mean shutting down all sports reporters and commentators.

And you point is?

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

But why make any statement at all? We are talking about a professional sports official in MLB. He basically admitted he either failed to do his job or didn't have the nerve to make the call, but had no problem bragging about it after the fact. We really don't know since the call wasn't made when the INT occurred.

Of course he should not have said anything, even at our level, walk away from reporters (or run if it's the CW).

But, just pointing out that a reporter comment or apparent quote can't be assumed to be the whole explanation.

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

And you point is?

Second typo today, is fo supposed to be of or for? Anyway, I thought we agree that TH should not ever explain rules.