Quote:
Originally posted by rex
Rule 4.09(b) is enough. It tells me the B/R has got to run it out. It tells me the penalty if he doesnt.
|
Ok, Rex, cool and dispassionate now. OBR 4.09(b) is NOT enough, believe me. Here is why:
1. It only covers a situation in which "
the winning run is scored in the last half-inning of a regulation game, or in the the last half of an extra inning.." OTOH, the PBUC ruling can occur following ANY 3rd out of any half inning, including the first!
2. It only covers a situation "
with bases full which forces the runner on third on third to advance..." OTOH, the PBUC ruling can occur on plays where the bases are NOT full, the runner from 3rd is NOT forced to advance, and where the 3rd out is the result of a time play.
3. It only covers a situation where "
the umpire shall not declare the game ended until ... the batter-runner has touched first base." OTOH, the PBUC ruling does NOT require the play to occur in a game ending situation.
Now, Rex, the reason that the batter-runner is required to advance to and touch first base when the game winning run is forced home from 3rd base is because of the Casebook Comment following OBR 6.08(a). This establishes that other runners are NOT forced to advance, following an award, until the batter-runner reaches and touches 1st base. So, it makes sense in a bases loaded force situation that the winning run from 3rd cannot be forced home until the batter-runner reaches and touches 1st base. This has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the PBUC ruling, which deals with a non-appeal 4th out in live-ball action following a batted ball.
The PENALTY following OBR 4.09(b) applies only where there are TWO outs, not THREE! The exact wording is, "
If, with two out, the batter-runner refuses to advance to and touch first base..." It cannot therefore apply with THREE outs, and in any case the PBUC ruling was not based on a play in which the batter-runner REFUSES to advance - he was instead
prevented from doing so by injury!
The reason that OBR 4.09(b) exists is to facilitate the legal scoring of a
game ending run where the R3 is forced to advance by an award to the batter-runner. The Penalty only exists to give the umpire a way to resolve a
refusal by the batter-runner to formalise that score by touching 1st base. It has NO BEARING on the PBUC decision whatsoever! It does NOT set a precedent that obligates the batter-runner to advance to and touch first base AFTER a 3rd out has been made! There is NOTHING but the PBUC ruling that does that!
Now you may call that response "unloosing your Wrath", but I'd call it a simple sequence of cold, hard facts that clearly establish that your conclusion is fatally flawed. Don't be bothered by that. I have drawn conclusions that were later proven to be flawed, too, and I survived!
As to establishing whether the batter runner is "forced" to advance, you need only raise your eyes to the level of OBR 4.09(a)Exception. If the batter-runner is truly "forced" to advance, why then is Exception(1) even necessary? Couldn't it be dispensed with, considering outs on the batter-runner would then be covered under Exception (2)? Where is the logic in discriminating between the two, if they are the same?
Cheers,
[Edited by Warren Willson on Mar 29th, 2001 at 01:36 AM]