Quote:
Originally Posted by GROUPthink
Besides an obscure J/R reference, I'm not sure you'd find anyone to agree with this.
|
This is disappointing. I have an old copy (1995) that I treasured back then. It seemed to have Bible-like status on these forums (Remember McGriff's?
). Granted the MLBUM obviously has the authority to back it up but is J/R really in this much disfavor now?
It was interesting that the prior cited Baseball Reference website has virtually my exact play. I agree with the majority of posters in this thread however. I think it was appropriate to have titled the thread as I did. The conclusion I draw is that the batter is not compelled or obligated to continue to first after a third out is made elsewhere. It's irrelevant. It will not benefit ("behoove") the offense in any way.
Instead of that lame ad hominem attack of the Baseball-Reference website, how about quoting it and then citing the rule that refutes it? I don't think you need to go further than OBR 7.10(d). It concerns
appeals, and my play has clearly been proven not to have an appeal.
SAUmp wrote this as I was typing above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAump
OP, close play at 1st. Instead of abandoning his effort to run to 1st, B/R runs vigorously past 1st base. Everyone in the stadium knows the batter was thrown out at 1st base, F5 to F3. However, the 1st base ump refuses to make a safe or an out call after seeing his partner make the proper call at 3rd base.
Is there any rule in existence to support no call at first base?
|
Yes, thank you. I was going to write something similarly. 5.07 works for me. Your play works nicely supposing F5 thought there was only 1 out. He tags out R2 after R3 scored and throws to first beating the B/R. I'd just smile, make no call and say there were two outs boys (and count the run on the time-play).