@nap_ano@Mrtweetspot@benno_nagel@stacah1 LMAOOOOOOO if the US can't follow the standard set by every other country that hosts FIFA events then we should not host the World Cup. Is that too complicated for you pumpkin?
@H8Paste@TheKingSourceN@JomboyMedia Here's a great example:
Runners on 1st and 2nd 1 out. Ball grounded to short and runner is put out at second the 2nd baseman then throws the ball wildly to first and out of play. With a balk the offense wouldn't be allowed to choose the runner scoring.
@H8Paste@TheKingSourceN@JomboyMedia No it actually does not. Hence why there is literally a choice option for catcher's interference. The rulebook is not semantics.
@H8Paste@TheKingSourceN@JomboyMedia Absolutely a balk is not dead right away under OBR. You are right on that. Unfortunately there is no choice option in a balk so you are wrong on that. There is a choice on catcher's interference there is not on a balk.
@H8Paste@TheKingSourceN@JomboyMedia Which literally says the balk is either enforced or ignored. There is no choosing. Thanks for proving you are wrong lmaoooooooooooooo
@Kyle_Doege@JomboyMedia There’s no thinking involved. If both he batter and runner(s) don’t advance at least one base safely then the balk is enforced. The reasoning would be the rule book. Hope that helps.
@JomboyMedia Painful the amount of people on here that don't know the penalty for a balk. There is no choice on a balk. The balk is either ignored or enforced. Even if the umpire did not call time right away the runner would have been placed on second because the batter didn't reach
@Kyle_Doege@JomboyMedia No the runner should not have been allowed to stay at third even if the umpire did not call time. Yes, he should not have called time right away.
@MartinBerliner@CardJunkie22@jcalvinmeyer He could have and if he had the runner would have been out. However, he did not so no the runner should not be called out for coach interference