Quote:
Originally posted by Bfair
"F2 drops the third strike. B1 starts toward the dugout and F2 does not throw to first. B1 then makes a quick dash to first.
Ruling: If F2 does not throw to first, he risks failure to put out B1. However, "B1 should be declared out for failure to attempt to reach first within a reasonable time if he does not reach the base before the time of the next pitch, he reaches his bench, or a half inning is ended because the infielders have left the diamond. (8-4-1l)."
__________________________________________________ ________
Have Carl explain this one to you Buster. Do my eyes deceive me, or does it say "B1 should be declared out for failure to attempt to reach first.
Now, read Carl's statement at the top of this page. I felt that umps declared people out for infractions. Maybe it's different in Edinburgh. Maybe they also declare them out for home runs down there. After all, they don't seem to want to make them run the bases.
Although Rule 8-1-1b uses the terminology "entitled" to run, it is obvious the interpretation as shown here in the casebook "requires" the BR to run or else he is declared out. I wonder why the Fed put in this casebook play.
Could it be to CLARIFY ?????
[/B]
|
I think you're stretching it here, Steve. Here's the difference: your play involves the BR representing the
potential third out; the play at issue involves the BR advancing
after the third out. There's surely a logical reason why FED added this stipulation...
Nobody on, 2 outs, batter swings at a dropped third strike. Batter starts to walk away, catcher is holding the ball, and nobody is sure what to do. One thing we do know -- the play ain't over until either the third out is made (in this case it can only be on the BR), or until the BR advances to 1B safely. When it becomes obvious nothing's going to happen, it's only common sense we put an end to the madness and kill the play, but we really only have 2 possible outcomes:
- Call the BR out for failure to attempt to advance;
- Place the BR on first for the defense's failure to attempt to put out the BR
Now we've all seen this play before -- dropped third strike, BR hesitates a little before realizing he can advance. So while the defense is figuring out who's leading off the inning, the BR ends up on 2B. That's a pretty good advantage for the offense? So why give the BR first base even when he doesn't attempt to advance? To preserve that offense/defense balance, we call the BR out when we feel he's missed his "window of opportunity." It's not merely that the BR is required to run because he must, but just that
something is required to happen, and we can't require the defense to attempt to put out runners, so the offense loses this battle by default.
With the play at issue, the defense chooses to play on another runner for the third out, so the BR is not "required" to advance to end the play, because the third out ends the play. (At least we thought so in OBR.) Again, it's not that
only the advancement of a BR can end a play, but that
something needs to happen to end the play, and the defense did that in this case. The BR is called out only when neither side attempts to do something.
Hope this makes sense,
Dennis