I thought I DID find a quote in the FED book about a batter being forced to advance, and I thought I quoted it. Page 46 Rule8-2-5 says, "With two outs, if the base missed was the first one to which a BATTER OR RUNNER was forced to advance, no runs would score."
I realize that, semantically, a batter does not have to go to first. Neither does a runner on first have to go to second. Etc. They can choose to just stay put, or take a couple of steps and stop. Of course, they put themselves in jeopardy...but if a batter is never "forced to advance", why is worded so on page 46?
I also realize this is one of those plays that will probably never happen, but that's not the point. The point is, it's a situation that, if it DID occur, would have to be ruled on. That's why the question was asked in the first place. If we only asked questions on obvious plays, we'd get lots of "DUH" answers. It's the hard ones that don't occur very often that enlighten us (as opposed to "burden" us, which some people lean toward). Carl got his great reputation for rules knowledge by fielding a zillion of these. We should all field as many questions as he has had thrown at him over the years. That's why people go to him for answers - if he doesn't know it directly, he knows where to get it. BUT - my philosophy with rules questions has always been "Don't stop looking for answers just because you find one". Pardon me while I keep looking.
