from Amazon
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Meals and default calls
Great pics by Mike.
I don’t believe that a runner is safe unless called out (i.e., presumed innocent).
I believe the standard should be what is likely to have happened, and then you need enough evidence to push you the other way. In this case, the default position should be that the runner is out, and the umpire should only call the runner safe if he actually can confirm that the catcher did not touch him.
It should be based on the odds.
This is unlike in hockey where the referee can only call a goal if he actually sees the puck cross the goal line. A goalie for example can be in the referee’s line of sight, be on top of the puck over the goal line (and should be called a goal), but the goalie can then slide back out of the goal area, get up, and the ref never saw the puck cross the goal line. And replays never are able to show the puck cross the goal line, even if he suspect (more than 50% chance) that the puck did in fact cross the goal line.
Basically what I’m saying is that I like the NHL rule that there is no goal unless the ref (or replay guy) sees the puck cross the line. But I would not apply that standard to the umpire calling an out (that the runner is safe unless the umpire clearly sees an out).
(In fact, I have no idea what the default point is. And, I don’t want to read that horrible rule book to find out.)
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 1 of 344 pages 1 2 3 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date