Quote:
Originally posted by DDonnelly19
How about the adventageous "5th out?"
Bases loaded, 2 out. Popup to F6. R3 breaks for home on contact; R2 holds near 2B, thinking there's 1 out. R1 breaks for 2B. F6 drops the ball. R1 passes R2, but after R3 scores. 3 outs. R2 then is put out while trying to dive back to 2B. 4 outs. Now the defense realizes that the BR has stopped on his way to 1B, thinking the play is over. Ball thrown to 1B, and the BR is out at 1B, therefore cancelling the run on the advantageous "5th out."
|
Your "fourth out" above is no out at all. The force on R2 to third was removed when R1 passed him, so R2's "out" would be an non-force out. This out has no bearing on what runs could score, so the out is not called. The BR, though, must still touch first for the run to score, by J/R's interpretation. They could then get him out for the "fourth" out of the inning, actually the third out replacing the out for passing.
Quote:
|
Here's what I don't understand -- is J/R advocating keeping the ball live after the 3th out, so that the defense may have a chance to cancel any run scored during the play? In the example given, the BR injured himself on his way to 1B, so is J/R saying that this special circumstance (runner is incapacitated before the 3rd out is made) allows the 4th out to be made?
|
Well, regardless of J/R, the ball IS live after the third out, so they can execute any "fourth out" appeals, which we all know and love. However, J/R is saying that, with three outs, a live ball could still be used to put out other runners to cancel runs.
I think the "injured BR" was just put in there as a plausible reason why runner didn't run to first.
P-Sz