|
Post by fantasyguru on Jan 4, 2013 23:22:54 GMT -5
Shouldn't the MI spot on the active roster also include C since technically a C is also part of the INF as well?
|
|
|
Post by boredme on Jan 4, 2013 23:45:30 GMT -5
MI is middle infield which has been defined as a 2B or SS for as long as I can remember. The INF position could possibly contain C as well, but Greg decided against that. Short answer: it doesn't count because rules say so.
|
|
|
Post by fantasyguru on Jan 4, 2013 23:55:22 GMT -5
I am sorry. I meant to say INF position. That was a typo. However, if Greg already said no, then this becomes a moot point.
|
|
|
Post by Tampa Bay Twins GM (Matthew) on Jan 4, 2013 23:59:34 GMT -5
I asked about it when we decided to add a the INF and extra OF position if the INF position would include catchers and Greg felt just CI and MI was the way to go. You can always put a second catcher at your UT spot. I tend to agree with Greg after more thought on it, since I don't like the idea of a team being able to play 3 catchers at a time.
|
|