If an ump did that to me, John, I would *not* have accepted it. I would have played the game under protest.
There is no "judgment call" when it comes to the rules. On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 8:58 AM, Beaudoin, John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > The rule book says 250 ft. > So, even if it leaves the field bouncing off a glove or head, then it > should still be a HR if it's 250ft or more from homeplate and stiil before > the foul pole. But i don't think it would ever be ruled that way. I think > all would accept GRD as the ruling. There are the rules and then there's > reality. > > ------------------------------ > *From*: [email protected] > *To*: [email protected] > *Sent*: Wed Oct 08 05:51:15 2008 > *Subject*: Re: Ripken > That's a different case because it hit the ground. In that case, its the > same as if the fielder threw it into the stands. The runner gets the base > he's approaching and the next one. In that case it probably means the > runner winds up on 3rd. I doubt an umpire would rule that a ball would have > been an in the park home run without the boot. > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 8:47 AM, Lobosco, Angelo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> Hmmmm.... >> >> >> >> Would that mean if a ball is hit into the corner, lands fair, and then the >> fielder "accidentally" boots it into the stands foul, it is a ground-rule >> double? Don't like the sound of that one... >> >> >> >> -Angelo >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> *From:* [email protected] [mailto: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Matt & Olga McSorley >> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 08, 2008 8:40 AM >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* Re: Ripken >> >> >> >> Still a ground rule double. By hitting the outfielder's head, it's a fair >> ball in play. If it had bounced over the wall in fair territory (recall Jose >> Canseco) it would have been a home run. But by bouncing into the seats foul, >> it has to be a ground rule double. >> >> >> >> -- Matt >> >> --- On *Tue, 10/7/08, Ray Salemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* wrote: >> >> From: Ray Salemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: Re: Ripken >> To: [email protected] >> Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008, 5:46 PM >> >> Here's a rule question I think we resolve in the office. >> >> Bay's ground-rule double hit the ground fair and bounced into the stands >> in foul territory for a ground rule double. >> >> What if it had high the right fielder in the head in fair territory and >> gone into the stands in the same spot without touching the ground? >> >> Ray >> >> On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 5:34 PM, Steve Gendron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Ripken made the point that whenever there is a collision at the plate the >> umpire always waits to see if the catcher is still holding the ball before >> making the out call - so why should this be any different? However, I think >> the difference is that if the collision causes the ball to come loose, then >> the runner would be safe. But in this case, the runner was tagged, Varitek >> was in control and the subsequent fall caused the ball to come loose. If >> the ball came loose in the act of tagging, the runner would have been safe, >> but that obviously was not the case. >> >> >> >> By the way, I thought Eck seemed a little nervous on the TBS broadcast. >> Not quite crisp as I'm used to hearing him on NESN. >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> *From:* [email protected] [mailto: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Tom Salemi >> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 07, 2008 9:48 AM >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* Re: Dave Campbell is a tool >> >> Cal Ripken raised a point on the post game. He didn't go as far as say he >> should be safe, but he asked what about when there's a collision at teh >> plate. If the catcher falls back after the collision and drops the ball, the >> runner would be called safe. No one had an answer as to why teh calls would >> be differnet. The anchor guy said maybe it's because the runner dislodged >> the ball as he tried to get to teh base. >> >> >> >> I don't see a controversy. The runner was called out five or six feet down >> teh basepath. >> >> As for Campbell, so what? So what if we'd be outraged. We're going to base >> calls on whether or not they upset the fans?? >> >> >> >> Aybar blew it (and I think Scoscia frankly overmanaged.) THe ump was fine. >> Scoscia only cried for 10-20 seconds. For a manager who gripes about every >> ball and strike it came across as a clearly just-for-show argument. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 9:39 AM, Beaudoin, John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >> >> There is no controversy for anyone but disgruntled Angels fans. When in >> doubt, ask a non-partisan baseball fan. Even Yankee fans would agree >> with the call. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Ouellette >> Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2008 9:36 AM >> To: Red Sox Citizens >> Subject: Dave Campbell is a tool >> >> >> He's on the radio going on and on about how the runner should have been >> safe after the missed squeeze bunt because Varitek dropped the ball >> after the tag. How Boston would be in an uproar if a similar call had >> been made against the Sox. >> >> He had the ball. He tagged the runner. He stumbled a couple of steps, >> fell, hit the ground and the ball popped out. Where is the controversy? >> >> Steve O >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Blog: http://blog.raysalemi.com >> >> "Why should a sequence of words be anything but a pleasure?" - Gertrude >> Stein >> >> >> </table >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Blog: http://blog.raysalemi.com > > "Why should a sequence of words be anything but a pleasure?" - Gertrude > Stein > > > > > > > -- Blog: http://blog.raysalemi.com "Why should a sequence of words be anything but a pleasure?" - Gertrude Stein --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Red Sox Citizens" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/redsoxcitizens?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
