quote:
Originally posted by Bighit15:
I am not the one that made the first legal analogy. You did. Just because I don't agree with you does not make me a moron. It doesn't matter whether he was tackled or not if the ss initiated the obstrcution by getting in front of the runner on purpose, then he is not guilt free either on the field or in then legal system. Your legal analogy was not well thought out. Actually it was stupid. Deal with it. It had nothing to do with baseball or the argument. It was just one of your bully tactics to win an argument. It is incorrect and ignorant.
Obviously you are not intelligent enough to make your argument otherwise people would not still be questioning your abiltiy to get your point across.
We all know that several rules apply here and it is up to the umpire to interpret and apply the rules. If you had a specific rule you would quote it. You don't.
The bottom line is that based on the actions of the ss, it leaves it open to interpretation. @ umps may not see it the same way. It depends on where you place blame and which rule you chose to apply to the situation.
TYPE (A) OBSTRUCTION
defense obstructs batter-runner before he reaches first
defense obstructs runner being played on
Status of ball immediately dead NCAA
OBR
delayed dead FED
Penalty award at least one base from position on base FED NCAA
award at least one base from base last touched OBR
TYPE (B) OBSTRUCTION
defense obstructs runner not being played on
Status of ball delayed dead ALL
Penalty award at least one base from position on base FED
award bases as needed to nullify obstruction NCAA
OBR
I read your post that was enough to know that you don't know. I don't argue with morons anymore, so when you have some real inofrmation, post it. Otherwise, stuff it.
Apparently you're too wrapped up in your own ignorance to comprehend the written word. I listed the rules and case book situations involved, but you refuse to believe them.
I never made any legal statements. I just said that in today's litigous society, you'd be open to charges. If you could read the rules you may (but I doubt it would get through your thick skull) that malicious contact (intentionally tackling) superceds obstruction.
Keep on teaching illegal tactics, and I hope you have liability insurance. It's said ignorance is bliss. If that's true, you are a very happy fool.