The “obstruction” call and legal reasoning–the winners and the coveted prize

I have carefully examined the arguments in favor of my hypothetical proposition that the ump screwed the pooch on the obstruction call. Jay Rempe (October 28, 2013 at 1:50 pm) and Gov’t IP Lawyer (October 28, 2013 at 2:40 pm) tied for best brief. Accordingly, they are both declared winners.

Their arguments using textualism, with old testament vigor, to arrive at the desired result warrant high praise indeed. Accordingly, each of them should send me their postal addresses via this blog’s e-mail address (find it here). In return, I will send them the envy producing prize. That is, both will receive a “Gold Tone Lapel Pin with Madison Head” proudly displaying the “Federalist Society” name and costing the undersigned five bucks a pop. It just can’t get any better than that!

RGK

PS I was tempted to award a second place prize to Nate Brunner (October 28, 2013 at 6:11 pm) since, as I remember it, his accuracy as a catcher throwing to third base was about as good as Saltalamacchia’s, but I decided against awarding prizes based on pity alone.

8 responses

  1. Thanks, Judge, for reminding me of the time I hit the left fielder squarely in the chest against Nebraska, in my hometown, in front of 5,000 people. As it turned out, the runner was NOT stealing left field. For the record, no one even tried stealing left field the rest of the spring after that!

  2. Sorry– obstruction, no question. (For the record, I was a collegiate catcher, the only person on my team who could stretch a triple into a double, and was born in Boston but hate Boston teams except for the Pats.)

  3. Ms McMahon:
    As was correctly noted, the runner choose to run over the player who had just dove for the ball and tripped on the runner. It’s on him … He’s out!!!!

    Go Sox

%d bloggers like this: