[Kaliix]

Using 7.01 to argue that the runner has aquired or occupies home base is illogical and wrong. The rule states that a runner acquires the right to an unoccupied base when he TOUCHES IT before he is out.

Since the BR does not typically ever touch home base, he is not occupying or has not aquired home base.

While the definition of a Force Play does have a long comment, it is in regards to the force being removed. There are two explanations, one about the force being removed during a play and one clarifying that an out for a runner failing to retouch after a caught fly ball is not a force out.

There is nothing wrong with the way the rule is written. The comments only clarify the how the force can be removed and what is specifically should not be treated as a force play.

There is also rules which indicate that the runner at first is put out, not forced.

APPROVED RULING OF 7.08 (a). APPROVED RULING: When a batter becomes a runner on third strike not caught, and starts for his bench or position, he may advance to first base at any time before he enters the bench. TO PUT HIM OUT, the defense must tag him or first base before he touches first base.

While there may be errors in the rules, I would tend to stick with the definition first and look at the various references second. Since the various references both support and contradict the definition, I am sticking with what the definition says, since it is, of course, the definition.

Can you go wrong using the definition to define a rule?