OBR 7.10. "Any runner shall be called out on appeal, when (b) With the ball in play, while advancing or returning to a base, he fails to touch each base in order before he or a missed base is tagged."
Gee, why are you trying to read into the sentence so much. The meaning seems clear to me. If the BR is advancing from 1st and runs over second but doesn't actually touch it, he has missed the base. He is running like he thinks he hit it and is advancing to another base. With the ball in play, if the defense astutely throws the ball to F4 at second and appeals that the runner missed the base, then the BR IS OUT! And it doesn't matter whether he has reached 3rd yet or not.
All parts of the rule have been met. The ball is still in play (the ball is thrown to F6 from the outfield and he throws to F4 at second), the BR failed to touch second while advancing to 3rd. Therefore if his missed base (2nd base)is appealed and tagged, he is out.
A missed base is a missed base.
The rule doesn't read "while advancing to and touching a base or returning to a base"... It simply talks about advancing or returning to a base and having missed a base while doing so.
The rule could legitimately read "Any runner shall be called out on appeal, when with the ball in play, while advancing to a base, he fails to touch each base in order before a missed base is tagged." I left out both "or" possibilities, but the rule still reads correctly. Missing a base is failing to touch each base in order and if appealed properly, results in an out under 7.10(b).
IMHO
Quote:
Originally posted by Gee
Any authority for any of the above, other than your say-so? Like a published "rule or ruling"? 'Cause, from the published rules, what you have written makes no sense.
------------------------------------------------------------
I wrote an article a few years ago concerning "Last Time BY" explaining the implications of a Missed Base, here is a part of that article:
".....OBR 7.10. says, "Any runner shall be called out on appeal, when (b) With the ball in play, while advancing or returning to a base, he fails to touch each base in order before he or a missed base is tagged."
That rule literally says that a runner has not "missed" a base, and so cannot be appealed, until he advances to and touches a base beyond the "missed" base. The reasoning is that if the runner proceeds past the missed base and doesn't reach and touch his advance base then he has effectively gained no base advantage under the rules, in terms of the actual bases acquired. He has certainly gained distance - at least temporarily - but he has not run the bases in the improper order and so he has NOT "missed" a base within the original meaning and intent of the rule. This is the true understanding of what is ADVANCING under this rule......"
So in the play you presented where the runner failed to touch first in passing and went half way to second he is not appealable under 7.10(b) because he hasn't touched his advance base and therefore is not guilty of missing a base.
Under todays rules he IS appealable due to the new ruling which extends 7.10(d) to all bases. Obviously, as explained above, you cannot use (b).
I checked your profile for an E-mail address to send you the whole article but it isn't there. If you or anybody else would like a copy, e-mail me at [email protected] and I will send it to you. G.
[Edited by Gee on Aug 9th, 2004 at 03:04 PM]
|