Does the Run Count?

[varefump]

Federation Rules

Two outs, R1 on 1st and R3 on 3rd. B6 gets a base hit driving in R3. R1 goes to 3rd but misses 2nd base. B6 gets tagged out trying for a double (for 3rd out). Then defense properly appeals that R1 missed 2nd (for 4th out).

Does the run scored by R3 count?

My first inclination is that the out on R1 is classified as a force out and therefore no run would score. Others in my association think it is simply a timing play & the run would count.

What say you?

[TwoBits]

First instinct:

Force was removed when BR was put out. The fourth out on the appeal provides no advantage to the defensive team (unless B1 had scored prior to BR being called out. Score R3's run regardless.

[MD Longhorn]

No force, run counts.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Do any of the answerers know this to be the approved NFHS ruling, or simply venturing a guess?

ASA would rule the force removed when the BR was later put out, rendering the subsequent appeal a timing play. NCAA would consider the appeal a force out, because their rule relates to "forced to advance at the time of the infraction", not the time of the appeal. I don't see either stated in the NFHS rule book.

Both NFHS and NCAA would allow a defensive team to substitute a beneficial fourth out; ASA would not, since the appeal wasn't on a runner that scored.

So, I repeat;

Do you know, or simply stating your opinion as if it were fact? Citation from NFHS, please.

[varefump]

I tend to agree with Steve. I am aware of the ASA and NCAA rulings, but the closest I can find in NFHS is case play 8.3.1(c). The ruling on this play indicates that the run would count "because there are only two outs".

I would venture to guess that this language indicates that the run would not score had the third out been the appeal at 3rd base.

Can anyone on this forum provide an official Federation ruling?

[TwoBits]

Think I found something similar enough:

NFHS 2013 Casebook 9.1.1 Situation D: R1 is on second base, R2 on first base with one out. B4 hits safely to the outfield. R1 scores, R2 misses second base and is standing on third base when B4 is thrown out at second base. A dead-ball appeal is properly made on R2 for missing second base. The umpire rules R2 out for the third out. Does R1's run count? RULING: No. Since R2 was forced to advance to second base, the appealed out at second base was a force out. No runs can score if the third out of the inning is the result of a force out (8-6-1; 9-1-1 Exception b; 2-1)

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by TwoBits

Think I found something similar enough:

NFHS 2013 Casebook 9.1.1 Situation D: R1 is on second base, R2 on first base with one out. B4 hits safely to the outfield. R1 scores, R2 misses second base and is standing on third base when B4 is thrown out at second base. A dead-ball appeal is properly made on R2 for missing second base. The umpire rules R2 out for the third out. Does R1's run count? RULING: No. Since R2 was forced to advance to second base, the appealed out at second base was a force out. No runs can score if the third out of the inning is the result of a force out (8-6-1; 9-1-1 Exception b; 2-1)

This case play answers the question regarding whether or not the force is still in effect for an appeal, despite the fact that the BR was thrown out. That is covered under 2-1-11 in the rule book. No problems there.

What the case play doesn't cover is whether or not a fourth out appeal on anyone other than the runner who scored is acknowledged under FED rules. There is another case play that does:

9.1.1 SITUATION P: With R1, R2 and R3 on third, second, and first, respectively, B5 hits a fly ball to F8 for the second out. All base runners tag up and advance one base. F8's throw to F5 retires R2 for the third out, but after R1 has scored. R3 did not tag up and was properly appealed by the defensive team (fourth out). Does the run by R1 count? RULING: The only time a fourth out (or fifth) would take precedence is if it negates a score(s). In the above case, the fourth out would not negate R1's run, because R3's out was not a force out. (9-1-1 Exception d, e; 2-1-13)

So, if the fourth out had been a force out, it would negate the run. That means in the OP, the run does not count.

[Steve M]

AND, if there is no definitive Fed position - use the national governing body's position on this.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Steve M

AND, if there is no definitive Fed position - use the national governing body's position on this.

But this is a case where they differ, ASA restricting fourth out precedence to a runner who scored. Unlike the result of the case play 9.1.1 SITUATION P above which shows NFHS allows any runner to be the fourth out.

...................

[Steve M]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

But this is a case where they differ, ASA restricting fourth out precedence to a runner who scored. Unlike the result of the case play 9.1.1 SITUATION P above which shows NFHS allows any runner to be the fourth out.

Then, in a Fed game, you go with the Fed position.

[UmpireErnie]

Sadly we have no NCAA ball here in The Last Frontier. I was unaware of the language in NCAA about considering the force "at the time of the infraction".

Since that language is absent from NFHS rules, I can only go with the rules as written. 9-1-1-c says negate the run if the inning ending out is a force. But 2-24-4 (Definition of Force) says that the force is removed at the time the trailing runner is put out. So to call this appeal a force without the language present in the NCAA book would be to read something in that isn't in the rule.

[Crabby_Bob]

Originally Posted by TwoBits

NFHS 2013 Casebook 9.1.1 Situation D:

I'm seeing Situation Oscar not Delta.

Originally Posted by UmpireErnie

Sadly we have no NCAA ball here in The Last Frontier. I was unaware of the language in NCAA about considering the force "at the time of the infraction".

Since that language is absent from NFHS rules, I can only go with the rules as written. 9-1-1-c says negate the run if the inning ending out is a force. But 2-24-4 (Definition of Force) says that the force is removed at the time the trailing runner is put out. So to call this appeal a force without the language present in the NCAA book would be to read something in that isn't in the rule.

9.1.1 Sit O clearly establishes that a properly appealed missed base force is to be judged at the time of the infraction.

[UmpireErnie]

Originally Posted by Crabby_Bob

9.1.1 Sit O clearly establishes that a properly appealed missed base force is to be judged at the time of the infraction.

9.1.1 Sit O is different from the play in the OP. In the casebook play, the trailing runner has not been put out so the force is still in effect. If the force has been removed by the trailing runner being put out prior to the appeal, then the appeal out becomes a timing play.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by UmpireErnie

9.1.1 Sit O is different from the play in the OP. In the casebook play, the trailing runner has not been put out so the force is still in effect. If the force has been removed by the trailing runner being put out prior to the appeal, then the appeal out becomes a timing play.

You need to read case play 9.1.1.D again, Ernie. It's pretty clear that when a runner misses a base she was forced to advance to, and the defense appeals, it is still a force out even if the force was removed when the BR (or trail runner being forced) is retired.

The only question is whether or not that force out as a result of a proper appeal may be recognized as an advantageous fourth out to negate a run. Case play 9.1.1.P alludes to an answer of Yes.

[Skahtboi]

Isn't the fourth out appeal strictly an ASA rule, and then, only on a runner who has scored? If so, then it renders this whole thread moot.