No, the very first play is as follows: "Time! that's batters interference, the batter is out. Runner, return to first."
@MH-Tesla
2 жыл бұрын
Not true. Rule 7-3-5. It's pretty clear.
@danradley7389
3 жыл бұрын
In the very first play, if interference occurred, the ball is dead and it doesn't matter if the runner was safe at second. Batter is out and runner returns to first.
@Godfather19704
3 жыл бұрын
ding ding ding, we have a winner. You immediately come up with "Time! That's batter interference! The batter is out, the runner will return back to 1st."
@MH-Tesla
2 жыл бұрын
That is wrong. Rule 7-3-5. NFHS. If the runner is stealing and is out, the play stands and interference is ignored. It's a delayed dead ball just as they teach in this video.
@billyray994
Жыл бұрын
@@MH-Tesla dead on, unless the interference is on strike 3 and less than 2 outs. Then the runner returns to the dugout. In the first example, the guy got the rule right but mechanic wrong. Call it first then fix it if you have to.
@Godfather19704
3 жыл бұрын
That dude in the white turtle neck needs to get over himself. "I don't got nothing". They're trying to get you to call interference dumb dumb, they want to see what you're going to call. You're supposed to play along.
@Jabulaya
2 жыл бұрын
I think hearing his side was good for the discussion though, because he's got a point: if the batter isn't intentionally interfering why would you call it? To which the answer is: because it's interference based on the rules they're running, whether it's intentional or not.
@terrymiller5270
2 жыл бұрын
That dude in the white turtle neck needs to get over himself.
@davidodom3549
2 жыл бұрын
nerds stick together i see
@davestrothers9972
3 жыл бұрын
Batters responsibility to get out of the way of catcher making throw. Batters box doe not protect him .
Пікірлер: 12