|
May I?
Here's a twist...
My take is we need to judge the intent of the batter-runner. There is no legal way for the offense to CONCEDE an out without being played upon. In T's play the BR is clearly cheating the defense out of a game ending double play. Desertion of efforts to advance cannot be intentional. The concepts of abandonment and desertion are not strategies for the offense. They are methods to save umpires the time (potentially infinite) of waiting for a runner who thought he was out to try an advance. In T's "oranges" play, the DP stands, game over.
In the original "apples" play, it would be hard for me to picture the real possibility of a BR who clearly thought he was out (depressed, mopey) making it to the dugout before the triple play could have been completed. However, I do believe that the BR could be called out, and in this particular case, with the BR truly believing he was out and not trying to cheat the defense (pant, pant), you could make a case for calling him out the moment he entered his bench area and thusly removing the force plays on the runners on base. Still, in continuous action with multiple runners and the play as you describe it, no one will be watching the BR and the timing of his entering the dugout would be next to impossible to ascertain. Therefore the practical ruling would be to call the play as it apparently was...triple play stands.
Babble, babble, babble.
D-Man
|