Quote:
Originally posted by akalsey
Quote:
|
the protest was that he should have to tag home on his way back
|
No, the umpire called him out because he DIDN'T touch home on his way back. The offensive team is protesting that this is an incorrect call.
From the description (the player was headed back to the home dugout) it sounds as if the player headed in a direct line back to third from wherever he was standing, bypassing home plate and perhaps not even entering the general vicinity of home.
With the limited information given about the location of the player prior to returning to third, and the fact that the protester admits his runner did not retouch home plate, there is not enough evidence to rule that the umpire incorrectly applied the rules. Protest denied.
|
"THE UMPIRE CALLED HIM SAFE AND CALLED TIME FOR THE PLAY. THE OPPOSING COACH THEN CALLED FOR A TIME OUT AND BEGAN ARGUING THAT OUR PLAYER WAS OUT AND THAT WAS THE END OF THE GAME.
THIS IS WHERE THE VIOLATION IS BELIEVED TO BE, IT IS THEIR CONTENTION THAT OUR PLAYER HAD TO DOUBLE TAG HOME PLATE. ONCE WHEN HE CROSSED HOME RUNNING IN AND THEN AGAIN RUNNING STRAIGHT DOWN THE LINE TO RETURN TO THE THIRD BASE.
IT IS OUR CONTENTION THAT HE DID NOT NEED TO TAG HOME PLATE A SECOND TIME BUT ONLY RETURN TO THIRD BASE. AT THAT TIME IMMEDIATELY BEFORE THEIR TIME OUT THE SCORE WAS 12 TO 11 THEIR FAVOR, WE HAD TWO OUTS, A RUNNER ON FIRST AND THIRD."
The visiting team lost. The umpire called the runner safe. The visiting team is the one protesting because it would have been the third out and they would have won. Instead they lost. The home team is not protesting that they should have lost.