Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueplate
R1 on 3rd. Batter hits grounder to SS. SS throws to catcher who is 2-3 feet up the 3rd base line with a knee on the ground(blocking the plate).
R1 slides into the catcher before she has the ball. After catching the ball she tags R1 who hasn't made it to home,because of her obstruction. Both are now laying on the ground. No malicious contact.
PU calls time and awards the runner home on the obstruction call. R1, hearing she is safe, runs towards her dugout(she never touched the plate).
The peanut gallery shouts that she never touched home. Then... the defensive team coach asks the PU "Did she touch the plate?" Never said he was appealing her missing the plate.
As such this was not a proper appeal...or was it? 
Questions:
Would R1 be called out or remain safe? If it had been a proper appeal. |
We can debate semantics and what is in and not in the Rules Book, but this is not a "proper appeal". The DHC's question is telling me that he does not know if R1 did or did not touch HP, at least that is how we, as umpires, should be interpreting his question. And believe me, I have had HCs in both softball and baseball come out and ask me the wrong question because they did not have a clue as to what happened more times than I care to admit.
I think that the proper response (and some might think it is a little cheeky) to the DHC's question is: "Coach, are you telling me that you do not know if R1 did or did not touch HP?" Hopefully, the DHC will understand what he has been asked and either get help from one of his ACs or make the proper appeal.
Because I can guarantee everybody reading my post if you answer the DHC's question with a "no" followed by the DHC appealing R1's not touching HP, you will most likely be writing a game report regarding the OHC's ejection because he/she vigorously objected to you telling the DHC that R1 did not touch HP thus enabling the DHC to appeal the play at HP.
MTD, Sr.