Perhaps I'm missing something in your explanation. So, what do you do once it has been established that BR missed 1st and a successful appeal is executed? He's out, right?
But then the BR never reached first ... which would require the umpire to invoke the catcher's interference penalty - right? Therefore, BR is
awarded 1st notwithstanding the appeal.
Quote:
Originally posted by Rog
re: "So, what you're saying is this: The out on BR stands (for failing to touch first) and the fact that he was a victim of catcher's interference does not allow the umpire to invoke that penalty and AWARD him 1st. Is this what you're saying?"
NO!
Situation #2: R2. BR doubles. However, the BR's swing was interfered with by the catcher. Catcher interference is ignored and the play stands. Play continues with the pitcher appealing to 1st that BR missed the bag. Umpire agrees. Now what?
The BR advanced to 2nd safely; so, the catcher's interference is negated.
But, what "J/R" states is: "A runner who, in the course of running the bases, goes by a 8.05 base, has either "touched" or "passed" the base. If he has touched the base, he is not vulnerable to a subsequent appeal that he has missed that base. If he has passed the base, he has failed to touch it, but is considered to have touched it until there is an appeal against his failure to touch. The defense has a responsibility to recognize a failure to touch a base."
Simply put, the BR is still responsible for touching each base in order; or, that missed base is subject to an appeal.
Teach them to "touch", coaches!!!!!
|