[greymule]

Odd coincidence. I was about to post my own question involving a runner missing 2B on the way back to 1B.

At first glance I thought this was easy, but now I notice a complicating wrinkle. Here goes:

R2 is out the moment he passes R1. Two out.

The appeal at 2B is denied. Although R3 missed it the first time, he got it "last time by" on his way back to 1B. However, R3 is still the third out on the force play that he reinstated by going back in the direction of 1B.

It would be tempting to say that in a continuous action play with the third out a force play, no run can score, so R1's run is nullified. However, at the time R1 scored, there were two outs, and the only available force out for the defense was R3 missing 2B. But R3, in returning to 1B, touched 2B and cancelled the appeal possibility. At that moment, after R1 has scored, R2 has legally touched 2B and we know that R4 gets to 1B.

With R1 having scored and runners legally on their bases, R3 opts to go back to 1B and reinstates the force. He is put out on that force play. The question is, Do we consider the reinstatement of the force play to have occurred after the play in which the run scored, or is it part of continuing action?

Well, what if R1 was the winning run in the bottom of the 7th? The run has scored. The game is over. R3 has touched 2B and R4 is on first. No possible force out is available to the defense. After that, R3's reinstatement of the force play is irrelevant. So in the middle of the game, I'd say score the run. Of course, now I will find out that ASA considers R3's baserunning mistake part of continuing action.