[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by SAump

Would the right word, abandonment, have changed the outcome?

Padres protest accepted, then withdrawn.

Padres withdraw protest over D-backs' walk-off | padres.com: News

Padres protested the runner must touch third base. Denied due to 4.09b. Not that I disagree with the 4.09b, nor allowing a run to score AFTER the third out was made after BOB awards.

But allowing the runner to run off the baseline and to apply no penalty on the runner when he should touch the next base, should matter. Someone on the Padres might call this a clear case of abandonment, before the run legally scored.

Clarification needed why the third out, inconsequential as it may be, was not granted.

They must have withdrawn the protest because somebody told them they were wrong. The only two requirements are that the runner from 3rd touch home plate and the batter-runner touch first base. What R1 and R2 do is of NO consequence. They are not required to touch the next base. Please show me where 4.09 (b) mentions R1 or R2. Clear case of abandonment? Here we go again!