|
Wade In: Nuance of words that means little except nit picking amongst ourselves and umpires -every 7 y/o T ball player knows that BR to 1B is a force out (ie touch base or tag); I certainly would never try to explain to a coach that the play at 1B wasnt a force because of lame rule wording that doesnt include that play.
Nit picking? Nuances? Lame Rule? Try explaining that to the coaches in a H.S. game last week in AK, which initiated this discussion.
Batter bunts, beats throw to 1B. Ball then goes to F1. B-R is told by 1B coach it was a foul ball and she crosses 1B heading back to home. Defensive coach yells for throw to 1B, which beats B-R who has now decided to get back on base. I won’t tell you what was called, but you make the call.
If a put-out at 1B is a force play, then the force was reinstated when the B-R went back past 1B and the defense needs only to tag the base before the B-R gets back. Which they did. So is the B-R out?
If a put-out at 1B is NOT a force play, the we simply have a runner off the base and she needs to be tagged with the ball. Which she was not. So is B-R safe?
You say every 7y/o knows this is a force out. Where did they get that? In every rulebook going back 70 + years, the term force out has never been used. It seems to occupy the same place in SB folklore as the “hands are part of the bat.”
Conversational, as Mike said. “Used as a matter of communicating.” But not a rule. And I think the ASA test is wrong when the supposedly correct answer states that a put-out at 1B is a force out.
WMB
|