Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron
What tag? An out for abandonment does not require a tag. In the OP, if F3 tags the runner, he's not far enough away to have abandoned. If that tips him off to return to 1B, we play on.
A runner is "immediately" returning to 1B if he's not going somewhere else. No WAY I'd call a runner out for removing protective gear while off the base. That's a ticket back to the small diamond.
|
If the BR is heading towards the dugout, he is not in the act of "immediately" returning to first base. If tagged, as in the original OP, he is out on appeal. In order to get the out for abandonment, you have to judge that he has progressed a "reasonable distance" away from the bag. It is possible that you don't think that the BR has progressed a "reasonable distance" in order to get the out for abandonment, but you can still get the appealable out for not "immediately" returning to first base. This appealable infraction is for first base only, where abandonment can happen at any base. From the original OP, we can have two different out calls for two different rules violations.
As far as a player removing his equipment off of the base ...
.... let's say that the BR beats out a banger at first and stops 15 ft. behind the base. Instead of returning to first and then ridding himself of his gear, the BR stays at his stopped spot and "dis-equipments." (takes off his elbow and ankle protection) While this is happening, the defense now appeals by either tagging the BR or first base. How can you not uphold the appeal? The defense recognized that the BR did not fullfill his base running responsibilities. By ignoring this appropriate appeal, you are disregarding a rule, which we are there to enforce, and will create an even larger "sh*tstorm."
I have never had to rule on this, but given the correct circumstances, I would uphold the appeal and deal with whatever objection that would result due to my ruling. Correctly upholding this appropriate appeal is no different than upholding any other appealable offence, such as a missed base or leaving too soon on a caught fly ball and should not be considered as being an OOO.
I agree with the post that said that upholding the appeal based on the BR taking his gear off
while returning to first would be inappropriate. That would be different from the example I described above.