Thu Jul 20, 2006, 10:13am
|
|
Official Forum Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dakota
bawls, you're adding things that are not being said to back your argument. I think we're all pretty close on this one, but here's the thing...
An appeal has to be made; it does not need to be verbal, but it must be an appeal. If the runner was forced to the base missed, and the stepping on the base is intentional, but close enough to the runner's having achieved the base, then the umpire is left unsure whether that was a late force out attempt or a live ball appeal. The umpire cannot recognize an appeal he is not sure is being made.
The classic live ball appeal, where everyone in the ball park knows what is happening, needs nothing other than the tagging of the runner or the base from the defense.
But, if there is doubt as to WHY the defense is intentionally touching the base, whether that be was this a force or an appeal, or was this the first runner or the second being appealed, the defense needs to tell the umpire what is being appealed. Merely touching the base, however intentionally, is not enough.
|
What about thios sequence - the fielder touches the base in an appeal situation, then the runner touches, then the fielder says some verbal indication of an appeal. All bang-bang of course, but also if not.
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT.
It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
|