The Simple Things

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

BUT the statement/rule is worded for the stupid.

The requirement is met when there is a runner on 1st base and a runner on 2nd base. If the bases are loaded, is that requirement still not met? Is there not still a runner on 1st base and a runner on 2nd base?

Trying to justify the stance that too many runners on base negates a given rule is just as moronic as all the idiots screaming "it's in the hole" on every tee shot.

It's worded for the connivers. Their argument would be that "It wasn't runners on first and second, it was runners on first, second, and third." IOW "It's only in effect when there are just runners on first and second". Technically correct. A lot of laws/rules get written/rewritten becasue some clever person found the loophole. The wording you don't like fixes it.