View Single Post
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed Feb 25, 2009, 11:14am
mbyron mbyron is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by bossman72 View Post
I think the big deal here is that in play 1, it says "a subsequent appeal will not be allowed." I'm confused as to why they would not be able to appeal his miss of 2nd after he is tagged during unrelaxed action...
The way to picture this is: R1 rounds 2B but misses it. He immediately scrambles back to the base as the ball comes in to the fielder. He's tagged out, off the base, as he reaches for the base.

According to the J/R principle of unrelaxed action, the runner in this situation, not the base, must be tagged to record an out. The rationale is not fully stated, but I suppose the runner is getting some credit for immediately trying to correct his baserunning error. This credit prevents the defense from appealing the missed base after tagging the runner off the base, and thus prevents an advantageous 4th out. A run could score on a time play, for instance.

Those who dislike the J/R principle deny that the runner gets any credit: if he missed the base, then he's liable to be appealed. Moreover, they argue, the "relaxed/unrelaxed" distinction appears nowhere in the rules. This more conservative interpretation declines to put an additional burden on the defense (tagging the runner, not the base, during so-called unrelaxed action) and allows a missed base appeal even when the runner is tagged off the base trying to get to the base he missed.

I have heard the more conservative interp before, but I'd like to know if it's in print (and authoritative).
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote