背水一战总算是打出该有的气势了~ 不过V-Mart的全垒打到底是不是主场优势啊 先来看看截图 http://ppt.cc/zvwS 根据棒球规则3.16 When there is spectator interference with any thrown or batted ball, the ball shall be dead at the moment of interference and the umpire shall impose such penalties as in his opinion will nullify the act of interference. APPROVED RULING: If a spectator clearly prevents a fielder from catching a fly ball, the umpire shall declare the batter out. 所以是裁判自由心证罗 Reddick或许可以接到吧(Maybe?) 但是 "clearly"? 我不认为 再来看看落落长的3.16 comment(台湾好像是翻成"原注"之类的东西 不管) There is a difference between a ball which has been thrown or batted into the stands, touching a spectator thereby being out of play even though it rebounds onto the field and a spectator going onto the field or reaching over, under or through a barrier and touching a ball in play or touching or otherwise interfering with a player. In the latter case it is clearly intentional and shall be dealt with as intentional interference as in Rule 3.15. Batter and runners shall be placed where in the umpire's judgment they would have been had the interference not occurred. No interference shall be allowed when a fielder reaches over a fence, railing, rope or into a stand to catch a ball. He does so at his own risk. However, should a spectator reach out on the playing field side of such fence, railing or rope, and plainly prevent the fielder from catching the ball, then the batsman should be called out for the spectator's interference. Example: (举例子而已 下略) 从截图来看 这球依照路径来说会clear the wall(至少裁判是这麽认为) 那Reddick这个守备就是reach over the fence了 但是 球迷确实是把手伸过去了 不过又来了 "plainly" 中文叫做"明显的" Did he plainly prevent Reddick from catching the ball? 我觉得没有。 结论:我认为没有误判。 大家认为呢? -- ◣ ◢ HEY~~~HEY~~~CHAAAAARLIE~! 　 。。。。。 ◢ ▁ ◣ ⊙ ⊙ ⊙ .◣ ▼▼▼▼ ㄟ◥ ㄧ◤ \▲▲▲▲ φ ◢ . \ . δ ./ㄨ \\/ˊ◥▄▄◤ \|/ㄑ ( ︶ ˋ\///\/. by Armour@joke --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 140.112.245.125 ※ 编辑: whalelover 来自: 140.112.245.125 (10/09 09:51)