Clipping:Excelsior Club membership; merger with the Enterprise
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 |
| Add a Clipping |
| Date | Friday, March 15, 1867 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting on the Excelsior Club annual meeting 3/14/1867] The Enterprise Club was at the same time consolidated with the Excelsior Club, making the latter Club number about 500 members. Brooklyn Eagle March 15, 1867 interpreting balls as dead SECTION TEN OF THE RULES.–This rule does not appear to be clear to the comprehension of some players; and, at the request of one, we shall endeavor to elucidate it, although the rule, as it read, seems to us quite clear. Last season, it frequently happened that the umpire would call a ball, and almost at the same moment the batsman would strike at it. Now, in this case, either the umpire erred in his judgment of the unfairness of the ball, or the batsman struck at a ball not within his reach, the result being a conflict in the interpretation of the rules, and dissatisfaction. In order to prevent this difficulty in future, Sec. 10 was introduced, and there is little doubt of its working satisfactorily through the season. In cricket, when a bowler delivers an unfair ball, the umpire is required to call out “No ball”, and this no ball, if it should knock down the wicket, does not put the batsman out, and neither if he hit it and the ball be caught can he be put out; and, at the same time, he is entitled to all the runs he can make off a hit “not ball”. In this new baseball rule this idea was followed out, and the result is that the rule Section 10 now makes every ball on which a balk or a “ball” has been called dead, and not in play to the extent of putting a player out, and at the same time bases can be given on it in cases where players are on any of the bases, and a [illegible] is called on a third ball. As we interpret the rule, too, when a balk or [illegible] called, and a player is on a base if the base-runner can make the next base before the ball is returned to the pitcher, and by him sent to the base player the base-runner is entitled to his base. The rule would have been expressly worded to make this clear and explicit, but for the confusion which prevailed at the time of adopting the rule; as it was, the other portion of the rule not being clearly worded, was voted down. The object of the rule was to still more enforce fair and legitimate pitching, and at the same time not to give any advantage to the batsman. New York Sunday Mercury March 24, 1867 |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | Edit with form to add a comment |
| Query | Edit with form to add a query |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
| Origin | Initial Hershberger Clippings |
Comments
<comments voting="Plus" />