[greymule]

A "fourth out" appeal to nullify must be on a runner who has scored. (5-5C).

5-5-C: No run shall be scored if a "fourth out" is the result of an appeal play of a base missed or left too soon on a runner who has scored.

When I read 5-5-C, my thought is, "True, but rather obvious." From those words, I would not interpret 5-5-C to mean that the fourth out nullification applies only to a runner who has scored. After all, 5-5-A is still in the book. But it turns out that 5-5-C means more than it says.

My case book says this:

5.5.7:

(FP Only): R1 is on 3B and R2 is on 2B with two outs. B3 strikes out, but the ball gets by F2. R1 scores and R2 is out at the plate. B3 failed to run to 1B and F2, after tagging R2, throws to 1B for the fourth out. Does the runner score?

Ruling: No run can score when the third out (last out) is made by the batter-runner before he reaches 1B, and, in this case, the fourth out replaces the third out. This would also be true if the last out was a force out at any base due to the batter becoming a batter-runner.

However, my case book is several years old, and 5-5-C was added to the 2003 rule book, without the usual explanation as to why. Rwest, your case play is apparently more recent, since it's the exact same play with a different ruling. So I guess you are right, and I now know one code that doesn't permit a fourth out to nullify a run except on the runner who scored. As well as one code that permits a BR to crash deliberately into F3 for the purpose of preventing a double play and cause her team to benefit from the infraction.

But I cannot understand the reasoning behind the change, nor can I see how 5-5-C alone specifies that only a runner who has scored can be nullified on a fourth out. Apparently a fourth out used to "replace" a third out. Where does it say that it no longer does?

If this is true, and your case book play seems to prove that it is, I will then take issue with ASA's organization of Rule 5-5. Part C should not be equated with parts A and B; it is not a full addition to those parts. It should simply accompany the note under Part B, as a clarification:

"Note: An appeal can be made after the third out to nullify a run, but such appeal can only be on a runner who scored."

Under ASA rules, the play I gave in the previous post is wrong:

Bases loaded, 2 out. BR hits a double to clear the bases but is out trying for 3B. BR is then called out on appeal for having missed 1B. The advantageous fourth out means that no runs score. All 3 runs are nullified.

No, all three runs count. Apparently once there are 3 out, you can't appeal a runner who didn't score. (This was a MAJOR change to the rules. I'm surprised it did not engender more discussion.)

So if you're the defense, do not tag the BR at 3B, since you lose the right to appeal 1B for the fourth out. Wait till the play is over then appeal 1B.

The more I think about this, it's absolutely crazy.