|
Excellent comparisons. My only two thoughts, unrelated to each other and just off the top of my head, are:
1. The runner force on a walk has already been awarded second and thus cannot go past it without being in jeopardy. In the original play, the base had not yet been awarded, and in an "active" appeal, the player is still attempting to obtain that base.
2. SITUATION: R1 on 1B and BR hits ground ball to right field. R1, believing the ball will be in the gap, prepares to round 2B and head for 3B. F9 makes a great play on the ball and throws it toward 2B. F6, on the 1B side of second, bumps R1 hard while trying to get in position to catch the thrown ball. This bump causes R1 to miss 2B and she take 3 steps toward 3B. R1, realizing the base was missed turns back toward second, where F6 applies a tag. RULING: R1 not out and awarded 2B.
Sure nbr 2 is a little different than the original play, in that the defense's actions are what caused R1 to miss 2B, but at the same time, the umpire would have been protecting her to 2B and she had advance past the base to which she was protected.
To add a little additional thought: What if in situation number 2, R1 would have been bumped, missed 2B and just continued to 3B without touching 2B. She'd have to be ruled out on appeal. In that case, wouldn't it kind of be the "inactive" appeal situation I mentioned above. She protected to 2B but gave up that right by disengaging from trying to obtain it?
__________________
Dan
|