[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Manny A
Quote:
Originally posted by cbfoulds
Quote:
|
NO, he's saying that the runner can't return to correct the baserunning error 'CAUSE HE'S ALREADY OUT, for cripe sake. Think horses, not zebras: you don't need any complex interpretation of 5.07 or any other rule: he's out, so he can't lawfully run bases anymore. This ain't all that hard, folks!
|
Alright, try this zebra then:
Same play essentially, but add R1 in the mix. B3 hits a gapper, R3 scores easily, but R1 is thrown out at the plate for the third out. B3, who is standing at second base, hears the defense call for a fourth-out appeal at first base because B3 did not touch it. Can B3 run back to first to tag it and remove the appeal attempt?
Remember now, it was R1 who made the third out at home, and B3 was not retired on the play. What prevents him from correcting his base running mistake and thwarting the defense's fourth-out appeal?
Manny
|
Nothing that I can think of: maybe someone else has an idea? Why do I think that you don't want BR to be able to respond to an attempt at a "4th out" appeal by trying to return & touch the missed base? The runner in the original sitch was already out; this BR is NOT out [yet]. Why should the defense be able to continue the action [in order to obtain an advantage], but the offense not be able to respond as they would in any other circumstance? Why is this causing you unhappiness? And in what way is it a zebra?
Are you proposing this "zebra" because you have a genuine concern about the correct ruling to be made if such a thing should happen; or is your original suggestion [of 5.07] and this "question" symptomatic of a craving for umpiring "mental gymnastics" [Tee has another term for it], thereby demonstrating one's "mastery" of the BB rules-arcana domain?
[Edited by cbfoulds on Jan 29th, 2005 at 03:51 PM]