Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve
And just when you chose the easy way out in bolting, it would be your luck to have a coach like CoachJM or Rich Ives who knows a thing or two about the rules say, "wait a minute there, Blue!"
It may be a tough call, but coaches need to coach, and they should have drilled it into these players' thick skulls to always touch first base in these situations.
|
SD Steve,
Why thank you for your generous compliment.
Were I the defensive coach in BayStateRef's situation, I'm honestly not sure what I would do. For two reasons.
1. I'm not sure I would have the "stomach" to challenge the umpire's failure to call the runner out for "desertion" per the 4.09 Penalty. When I say that, I don't mean that I would be "afraid" to or "too intimidated" to do so, it's more a question of my peculiar notion of fairness.
The PRIMARY reason the other team scored the (apparent) winning run is that my pitcher threw a wild pitch for ball four. Too my way of thinking, the fact that the umpire didn't "bail me out" by making what MAY be the "technically correct" ruling on the play is NOT the kind of thing I would typically "appeal" on. The umpire's ruling didn't put my team at a material disadvantage, my team' PLAY did.
2. If I were to find the "stomach" to appeal, I can't figure out HOW I would do it in a procedurally correct way that would not somehow "tip-off" the offense that the BR really ought to complete his award.
My thinking on this question is also materially influenced by the commentary of a gentleman named Bob Pariseau in his reply to me on a similar (though not identical) situation on a different board from a couple of years ago. Rather than try to paraphrase what he said (and screw it up), I will simply "cut and paste" his comments here for the edification of those who care to read it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bob Pariseau
CoachJM asked me to comment on the abandonment thread that occurred a while back. Since I'm coming in quite late in this I'll start a new thread to get it back where people will see it.
Here are my thoughts on this:
1) Abandonment is a last resort call made by the umpires when necessary to resolve what would otherwise be an impossible situation when the game needs to continue but the runners have stopped playing. When the game is apparently over there is no need to keep the game going and so no need to declare abandonment. The defense has the appeal option at it's disposal as necessary to cancel the apparent game winning run(s).
2) An Out for abandonment does not exist unless an umpire declares it. There is no after the fact review possible here that the umpire SHOULD have declared it, affecting subsequent action. It is a judgement call and not subject to outside review. The basic idea here is that subsequent action is impacted by whether or not the umpire declared the abandonment out, so the out can not be imposed AFTER THE FACT.
3) An Out for abandonment is an exception to the usual rules of what constitutes a force out. Never treat an Out declared for abandonment as a force out even if the runner was forced to the base he never reached.
4) The Batter-Runner who has not yet reached first base can not be declared Out for abandonment. If the Batter-Runner is entitled to first base without jeopardy, and refuses to go there in a game ending situation, he can be declared out and that out WILL count as an out against him before touching first base. The same can NOT be done against R1 or R2, although it CAN be done against R3 forced home without jeopardy. Nor can it be done against BR when he IS in jeopardy -- the defense must play against him to get the out. If BR in jeopardy fails to advance and the defense leaves the field believing the game over then the umpire does NOT unilaterally declare BR out.
5) In addition to the usual causes for appeal of base running infractions, the defense is also entitled to make appeal style play to get an advantageous fourth out -- basically to keep play going to get force outs even though the third out has already occurred. In particular, the defense *CAN* "appeal" that a runner forced to a base, who has already been declared out for abandoning his effort to get to that base, in fact never reached the base -- and thus promote a non-force abandonment out into an "appeal" force out.
6) The most current interpretation is that the order of appeals matters in determining whether an appeal out is still a force out.
------------------------------------
On the action described in the original play, I would not declare R1 out for abandonment or BR out for failing to go to first -- such outs are NOT REQUIRED TO KEEP THE GAME GOING since the game winning run has apparently scored and the defense has full opportunity to play to cancel that run without having to chase R1 or BR. However the ball is still live despite the apparent end of the game and the defense can still get force outs at 2B and 1B to cancel the apparent game winning run. Their "appeal" at 1B is actually "normal" play despite what they thought. BR is Out for the second out and the force is removed on R1. Any subsequent play on R1 can no longer cancel the game winning run and thus the game really is now over.
If the game umpire had chosen to declare R1 out for abandonment for the second out, then the "appeal" at 1B against BR would indeed be the third out, cancelling the apparent game winning run.
The practical upshot of all this is to do just what the game umpire did. Treat the game as over. When the defense tags 1B declare BR Out for the second out, the force now removed on R1, and the game really IS over.
--Bob
[ Modified 6/27/2004 5:29pm by Bob Pariseau ]
|
JM