[Manny A]

Just to stir things up a bit, I prefer the baseball rule that does allow the defense to take advantage of a fourth out appeal on any runner besides the runner who just scored.

Sitch: Bases loaded, two outs. Batter hits one down the right field line for extra bases. R1 easily scores, R2 rounds third and scores as well. R1 tries to score, but gets thrown out at the plate by a perfectly-executed F9-to-F3-to-F2 relay for the final out of the inning. During the play, the BR never touched first base on her way to second.

To me, the offense should be penalized for the BR's failure to touch first. Why should the violation just go away because the third out was recorded elsewhere and a fourth out appeal isn't viable?

Heck, we're actually penalizing the defense for making a play on R1 at the plate, which is expected of a good, agressive team. If they hadn't made that play at home because they got lazy, muffed the relay, or threw the ball away, and then appealed the BR's violation at first, they would benefit from their ineptitude and wipe off three runs. But by playing sound, fundamental ball, they give up two runs. What's the sense in that?

That said, I don't agree that a runner should be held liable for not running all the way to the next base after the third out is recorded, such as the BR failing to advance to first after grounding into an inning-ending fielder's choice. There should be no requirement to continue running after three outs. But in the play I provided, the violation occurred during live ball play before the third out happened. Those types of violations should be subject to fourth out appeals.