[mcrowder]

I can definitely see both sides of this, and DO believe that the powers that be should address what appears to be not only a grey area, but one where reasonably well-informed "rules-guys" can disagree 100% on.

From my POV, this runner has scored. She cannot unscore and is not subject to being tagged out after crossing home. It is her status as a "Runner who has scored" that keeps her from being tagged out after crossing home. A runner who has scored cannot unscore (again, excluding any runner who has other unfinished correctable duties such as returning to touch a missed base or a base left early on a caught fly ball). Since she can't unscore, she cannot be subject to a tag upon returning to third base (and would be subject to interference should she draw a throw when another play was possible).

Here's another issue I have with the concept of her being in jeopardy if a COACH tells her to return. Lets examine this play without the coach telling her to go back. She crosses the plate, and other play stops. As umpires, we send her back. We do not kill the play, ball is still live. If, say, a runner on 1st were to take off for 2nd with the ball in the circle while this runner was returning to third, we'd ring her up. More evidence that the ball is live at this moment. But we send her back, and NO ONE thinks she's liable to be put out as she's returning.

So why would we change this opinion solely on the basis of who the person is that told her to return to third? The coach is doing what he thinks he's supposed to do - telling his girl that he knows must return to 3rd that she must in fact return to 3rd. There's no reason to change the jeopardy status of this runner based solely on what individual told her to go back to 3rd.