In the match between Hanwha and LG in Jamsil on the 20th, a rare scene came out.

At the end of the 9th inning when the score was 1-1, LG attacked. 1st base, 7th Lee Jae-won at bat, pinch hitter Jung Joo-hyun came out. In the ensuing ball count 1-1, the moment Hanwha pitcher Park Sang-won was about to throw the ball, first base runner Shin Min-jae left first base.스포츠토토

Sole steal or hit and run. Either way, Hanwha Battery read the LG move. The ball was taken out by pitching out, but the moment Choi Jae-hoon received the ball and tried to throw it to second base, he was hit by a bat thrown by Jung Joo-hyun and collapsed. As a result, LG’s strategy was hit and run, and Jung Joo-hyun threw a bat when he couldn’t hit with a normal swing.

This scene became the ‘highlight’ of professional baseball on Saturday night. It was a scene no one was familiar with. So 4 Sims gathered. It was the intention to make a decision as error-free as possible with a ‘agreement decision’.

After discussions in the 4th trial, the decision was ‘obstruction of the blow’. On this day, the referees at Jamsil Stadium seemed to have applied a general situation in which the hitter’s bat caught on the catcher’s mitt was regarded as ‘hit interference’ at the crossover point between hitting interference and defense interference. But it was a mistake. Not long after, the KBO (Korea Baseball Organization) immediately delivered an official press release that the related decision was a mistake. “As a result of additional confirmation, the KBO referee committee was in a situation where it had to be judged as defensive interference rather than hitting interference,” he said. The KBO also announced a follow-up disciplinary action against the referee.

The problem is that even after reaching a 4-sim agreement, they made a mistake. The coming of the referee often comes out. Video reading, a device to minimize this, has also become common. However, video reading is only a complementary device to correct the ‘limits of vision’. ‘Agreement decision’ deals with scene interpretation issues. Public confidence in baseball rules is at stake, which is directly related to the authority of judgment.

The controversial scene on this day was the content corresponding to clause 4 of baseball rule 6.03 ‘acts of foul play by batters’. ‘If the batter hits the catcher (including the mitt) by throwing the bat into the fair or foul area with a third strike pitch or runners present’, it is specified that ‘the batter is out for foul play’.

If it’s a pity, it’s not a common scene, but it was a scene that could come out enough. It was a scene and content that the 4 judges gathered to make a decision, and the referee committee could correct it within a long time.

After the ‘agreement and agreement’, there was also a reaction that it was difficult to understand the application of the rules in the relay box at Jamsil Stadium that day. KBSN Sports commentator Ryu Ji-hyun, who relayed the game that day, commented on the scene during the broadcast and said, “If you hit normally, it is correct to interfere with hitting. However, the results were thrown at the bat. He threw a bat and interfered with Choi Jae-hoon’s throw. Personally, it is a difficult decision to understand.”

It is a world where you can look into movements down to 0.01 second thanks to the development of imaging equipment. It is also a world in which either side can understand to some extent about the judgment of the out and safe of an extremely ambiguous scene. However, ‘agreement decision’ is different. This is because it is the area of ​​effort and the area of ​​preparation. Having offseason discussions about the many scenes that could come out of the field would be part of this process.

This is not the era of living with the authority of one’s seat. It is also not a world where referees move with the authority of their position as in the past. However, the authority to judge is still needed. This is because the authority of judgment is the system that moves the ground. On Saturday, Jamsil Stadium’s ‘agreement decision’ made a dent in the authority of the judgment itself.