Scholz and MM
- Thread starter aggie_brent
- Start date
because they left a superior conference for an inferior conference.
Aggys will NEVER be relevant again until they come back to a REAL conference!
Agree?
because they left a superior conference for an inferior conference.
Aggys will NEVER be relevant again until they come back to a REAL conference!
Agree?
I should of never got banned because I'm not a troll like you and not a tattle tale like you roaches!
Bomb totally botched it on all his posts about it being interference "obviously" on the last play. First off, it would be obstruction and not interference. And there has to be contact. It was close, but there was no contact and the ump made the correct call.
We did really botch that rundown though and were lucky.
We did really botch that rundown though and were lucky.
Last edited:
Here's the actual rule on "obstruction". It makes no reference of contact just have to "impede the progress of the runner". The run would have easily scored if the runner didn't have to hesitate because nobody was covering home.
SECTION 54. The act of a fielder who, while not in possession of or in the act of
fielding the ball, impedes the progress of any runner.
See specific rule sections for action to be taken: catcher (8-2-e); fielder (8-2-e,
f and h, 8-3-e, f and g); visual obstruction (8-3-f).
Type 1 Obstruction:
When obstruction by a fielder is committed against a runner
on which a play is being made, the umpire shall call “That’s obstruction” while
pointing at the obstruction and then signal and call “Time.” The ball is dead
immediately. All runners shall be awarded bases they would have reached had
there been no obstruction. The obstructed runner shall be awarded at least one
Never said a word. Must have been others. Use profanity all the time and people will complain.
You think I'm the only one here to say dumb@$$? And glad to know that a kindergarten word hurts people feelings and MM wasn't the one who put me in time out. And the only ones who complained are tattle tale aggy.
And about bomb posts I don't know you are suppose to be following your master.
My bad on thinking you deleted him.
But back to your interference/obstruction claim, how does he impede him if there is no contact?
The runner is coached to run into to someone without the ball to get the obstruction call. However, I have never seen obstruction called when there is no contact. It just is not called.
Do understand what the word impede means? I've seen obstruction called many a times from a player impeding the runner from reaching a base.
Bomb,
You showed me you had no idea what you were talking about it when you called it interference instead of obstruction. Two totally different rules. That was not obstruction and Cal did not argue that it was.
You showed me you had no idea what you were talking about it when you called it interference instead of obstruction. Two totally different rules. That was not obstruction and Cal did not argue that it was.
You are right. It does not change the rule, but it does show you don't have a grasp of the rules. It is like calling a charge a block in basketball. Two clearly different terms. And you continues to make the same mistake. Nice try though.
Last edited:
No it shows that I wasn't paying much attention and really didn't think about the wording.
says the aggy on the longhorn board, lol.
so which are you, obsessed, addicted or both?
Hook 'em
The cal runner was looking back at the 3rd baseman, the catcher got out of the baseline, and in no way impeded the runner. I have worked many games as an official and that is a judgement call.
Not sure why the runner was trying to get home from 2nd on that play. They should have taken the booted ball as a gift and moved on to the next batter.
Both teams had terrible base running in that last inning.
Not sure why the runner was trying to get home from 2nd on that play. They should have taken the booted ball as a gift and moved on to the next batter.
Both teams had terrible base running in that last inning.
First, Horn fans should never complain about calls or no calls.
Second, it was a weak bet on both sides even though Brent won based on the agreed to terms.
Lastly, say what you want about Scholzie and I say a lot but he has always been a dude I have known to honor a bet.
Second, it was a weak bet on both sides even though Brent won based on the agreed to terms.
Lastly, say what you want about Scholzie and I say a lot but he has always been a dude I have known to honor a bet.
Can you please post this link? Not trying to weasel out of the bet but I honestly thought we were betting on who advanced further in the postseason.
Seeing as how you're a bald faced liar on the posting on the weekend thing.
You are right if there had been contact it would almost certainly have been called obstruction. With no contact, it is a judgment call and is really called. Bomb did not know what he was talking about it calling it interference for sure.
Phrase it like you want. You did not know what you were talking about is the easiest way to say it.
You posted three times on Sunday May 24th. Check your post history.
Here is the link. Enjoy your sig.
http://texas.forums.rivals.com/threads/baseball-rpi.4252/page-6
Similar threads
