[Rita C]

Originally Posted by jicecone

Thank you Rita, this is the closest authoritative ruling I have seen here. I believe it is still in conflict with 7.01 but if that is the official interpretation then I can accept it.

I am going to keep researching for my own peace of mind though.

Again, Thank you.

Only problem is, it's from 1920. But it's all we have.

Here's 7.01 from JEA

7.01 A runner acquires the right to an unoccupied base when he touches it before he is out. He is then entitled to it until he is put out, or forced to vacate it for another runner legally entitled to that base.

Official Notes - Case Book - Comments: If a runner legally acquires title to a base and the pitcher assumes his pitching position, the runner may not return to a previously occupied base.

Cross References: 7.03, 7.08(i)

Historical Notes: The original Major League Code of 1876 established this baserunning premise and determined who had legal rights to a base.

The wording of this rule was experimented with over a period of several decades. Finally, in 1967, the rule was written as it appears today. This wording clarified that a runner acquires the right to an unoccupied base when he touches it before he is out, and he can occupy it until he is forced to vacate it for another runner legally entitled to that base. The old wording was ambiguous in that it merely stated that the runner could legally occupy it until another runner (any runner, presumably) forced him to advance. As one can see in Rule 7.03, not all advancing runners are legally entitled to their next base.

The Official Note prohibiting a runner from illegally returning to a base was added to this rule (7.01) in 1963. It reflects the sentiments of the rulesmakers in the early part of the 20th century (circa 1920) who wanted to put an end to "trick plays" on the bases and "freak deliveries" from the pitcher. Prior to the proscription against this baserunning ploy in 1920, managers would use this unorthodox strategy in an attempt to score a run. With runners on first and third, the runner from first would attempt a steal of second hoping that the runner from third would score on the throw to second. If the strategy did not work and the runner did not score, the runner on second would "steal back to first" on the next pitch. Hopefully, this would instigate a poor throw which would produce a run or, at least, set up the trick play again. ¬This strategy was not in compliance with the objectives of the game as the rulesmakers intended and thus the legislation against it. Additionally, this legislation came on the heels of the Black Sox scandal and was deem necessary to help restore public confidence in the game.

See rule 7.08(i) for historical evolution of reverse baserunning.

Professional Interpretation: Unless forced by virtue of the batter becoming a runner, the preceding runner or original occupant has the legal right to a base. When forced, however, the original occupant can be retired by tagging him while on that base or by tagging the base to which he is forced before he touches it.

Once the batter-runner is retired, all force plays are removed.

When the pitcher assumes his position on the rubber prior to delivery, no runner may return to a previously occupied base. If he attempts to do so, the umpire shall call "time" and declare him out.

Originally adopted to eliminate a trick play and unorthodox strategy, this rule accomplished its purpose. Such shenanigans are unheard of in the modern game.

Umpires should be alert and declare out any runner who should return to his previous base after the pitcher has assumed his position on the rubber. This could most logically happen when the runner felt that he "left too soon" on a tag-up and would attempt to return before an appeal was made on him.

Situations: One out, runner on first. The batter pops a quick one-hopper to the first baseman. The first baseman fields the ball, tags first base, and then tags the runner who never left the base. Is this a double play?
RULING: The batter is out but the runner is entitled to remain at first since the "force" was removed before he was tagged.

One out..runner on first. The batter drills a line shot toward right field. The 1st baseman makes a spectacular diving effort and knocks the ball down. The runner thinks the ball is caught and returns to the base. The 1st baseman picks up the ball and crawls to the base. He tags the original runner who is standing on the base and then tags the base before the B-R arrives. Who is out?
RULING: This is a double play. The runner was forced to vacate 1st and so he is declared out even though he was on the base when tagged. The B-R is out on the force at 1st.

So here's how I see it. R3 is legally entitled to third, if he's standing on it, IF he gets back to it. That didn't happen in this situation.

Rita