|
Dave:
First, welcome to the battle! Don't worry that I might feel you have directed your comments "at" me: unlike some others, I am not so sensitive a plant as to wilt if someone flames in my vicinity [which, actually, you did not].
On to substance:
You are right, it is possible to read 2.00 "Double play" in a way that supports the notion that FPAF is a "force". I have not previously dumped on that notion, although it clearly is one of the 406 [made-up #] "known errors" in the ORB. Why is it an error? Because there is a separate, specific rule that makes BR out at 1st if the base is tagged; thus the PAF does not have to be a FPAF for the example of a "reverse DP" [which is one of the WORST pieces of writing in the whole ORB] in the defn. of DP to be correct.
My "hints" were directed at focusing the attention on the last question I asked: "tell me, does BR have a 'right to occupy' Home, which he can lose by reason of another runner gaining title to that base?"; which is tied into the book defn of a "Force play". [BTW; thanks for pointing out my proofreading error, I did mean 7.01, not 7.02]
The "hint" for 7.08(i)cmt is relevent to the very issue that seems to excite the FPAF debate: BR touches 1st ["an unoccupied base"] and the retreats to home. Now it should be obvious to everyone that BR can be put out if he is tagged ANYWHERE off 1stB in this sitch, including standing stock still on Home. [In fact, there is an AO in the BRD (don't have time to look it up right now) which holds that if BR retreats and actually touches or goes past Home, he is out even if NOT tagged] Reason why this is important: the same is not necessarily true for a "force" at any base other than 1st. 7.08(i)cmt says [or at least seems to say] that the "forced" runner is NOT out if tagged while standing on the base to which he "retreated".
No?, you say?? Check out 7.03: "if, while the ball is alive, two runners are touching a base, THE FOLLOWING RUNNER shall be out when tagged. The preceeding runner is entitled to the base." Now, by separate rule, if a runner is forced to 2d, touches same and then retreats to and stands on 1st, along w/ BR, "the force is reinstated" and the runner may be put out by tagging 2nd base. However, by 7.03, if the defense chooses to tag BR first [w/ 2 on 1stB]: BR is out!
I tend to suspect that 7.03/7.08(i)cmt together create one of the 406 "known errors", and even if not, nobody is likely to argue w/ you if you call the idiot "forced" runner out when he is tagged while jostling his BRunning brother for space at 1st after retreating from 2nd. In fact, the idiot is the one everybody expects to be out in this sitch, and using HHH's "give 'em what they expect" philosophy, you probably AVOID an argument by calling this runner out, even if the rules might be capable of a reading where this would be wrong.
The point of my "hints", recall, was to direct attention to the circumstances which demonstrate that the BR to 1st play CANNOT meet the definition of a "Force play". Recall that I acknowledge that it is customary, and even useful, at times to regard this as a "force" {and as we have seen, the defn. of "Double play" is one such instance enshrined in the rule book}, and most of the time, it makes no difference if you get this "wrong": force or no, BR is STILL out - if not by "force", then by specific rule that has the same result as the play being a "force".
Recall further, however, that there are circumstances where the issue of "is it [ACTUALLY] a force" makes a difference, namely: if BR touches 1stB safely, but then retreats and is tagged off base do runs score; and must BR be tagged in this sitch, or will tagging 1stB do the job ? We've brought greymule around on this one, I hope we've got you, also.
If not, feel free to continue to argue with me, quoting my words back to me if you feel you can thereby demonstrate a flaw in my reasoning. As long as you don't use the "It IS, it JUST IS!" line of "logic" exhibited by some; or ask me to "give a rules citation" I've already given: I promise not to call you names. Deal?
--Carter
[Edited by cbfoulds on Aug 11th, 2004 at 09:45 AM]
|