Yeah, they just played here two weeks ago. And to continue with the theme, Marcia Ball will visit over the summer

I wasn't posting a picture of Mike, it is what the world's most interesting man has to say...:cool:

You may be a rude SOB, nut you have great taste in Music!!
;)

You would be shocked......oh, and BTW, bite me :D j/k

:p

Yeah.....there are quite a few better ice creams out there. But for a reasonably priced product. It is hard to beat.

Joel

i never understood why softball went out of their way to add an extra step in describing the runners by using "RX is on Y base" when you could just use the baseball way and simply say "RX" where X is the base they are on. in case i didnt now write that well, why make the description of the runners longer and potentially more confusing. 1st and 3rd sounds a lot easy and better saying "R1 R3" than saying "R1 on thirdbase and R2 on firstbase"

By designating a player by the manner in which they participated in the game/inning you can have a continual scenario without changing a player's designation.

In baseball, if bases are loaded and each runner advances a base, R2 is now R3, R1 is R2 and the BR which was the B is now R1. In softball, B4 becomes a BR and then is R4. This indicates that R4 was the 4th batter of that inning and no matter what happens, will be designated by the "4" throughout the inning.

It also make sense that one comes before two, two comes before three, etc.

I find this much easier to follow when going through scenarios.

One hell of a performer, if you have never seen her. If you have, well, disregard my previous comment.

The argument over which is better is irrelevant. I didn't invent the softball nomenclature, and it is unlikely to change. Therefore, use it when discussing softball scenarios. To do otherwise disrespects the game and hints of elitism.

The way calling IP's was explained to me was:

Call what happens first.
hands together when stepping on the pitchers plate
stepping back
stepping forward
not dragging

I am sure there are others.

If they fix the first then don't fix the next then call that.

Here is the issue. There is no prescribed remedy to fix any of them that I can find. The mere described action is an IP. Nowhere does it state the IP is delayed pending possible correction.

I read that differently than you did. Call the first pitch illegal for the first thing that makes it illegal. If on the subsequent pitch, they fix the first thing, call the second thing. Etc.

Okay, I can see it reading that way and agree.