Walk-Off, I think

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by DG

Game ending only. MLBUM 4.11 and rule 4.09b in 2014 book, 5.08b in the new recodified 2015 book. On any game ending play, walk, or hit batter with bases loaded R3 must touch home and BR must touch 1b before game ends. Security guard pickup appears irrelevant.

Except for the word "play" ... you are right until the last sentence...

If the security guard doesn't pick up the ball, and a fielder does... all you have is a force out at 2nd base.

[DG]

I think the security guard picking up the ball is not relevant because by the time he did BR has touched 1b and R3 has touched home and game is over.

[Rich]

Forced runner must advance on a batted ball.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Except for the word "play" ... you are right until the last sentence...

If the security guard doesn't pick up the ball, and a fielder does... all you have is a force out at 2nd base.

You also might have an appealed force out at 3B if you think R2 missed it before the appeal at 2B.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by umpjim

You also might have an appealed force out at 3B if you think R2 missed it before the appeal at 2B.

Except that they immediately threw it to, and touched, second base.

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Except that they immediately threw it to, and touched, second base.

Again using Wendestedt, in OBR the order of forced base appeals does not matter. If the force existed at the time of the miss it is a forced base appeal. From the video it looks like R3 peeled off before getting to 3B before 2B was tagged. But, an academic exercise due to the security guard.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by umpjim

Again using Wendestedt, in OBR the order of forced base appeals does not matter. If the force existed at the time of the miss it is a forced base appeal. From the video it looks like R3 peeled off before getting to 3B before 2B was tagged. But, an academic exercise due to the security guard.

I guess what I was trying to say was that if the events happened just as they actually happened in the video, but it was a fielder who retrieved the ball instead of the guard, we simply have a force out at 2nd. I was not commenting on other plays that might have been available ... I was only commenting on what the ruling would be given what they actually did, only changing the person that retrieved the ball.

[ozzy6900]

I don't see what the confusion in this video is all about. In OBR, the lead runner must advance and touch home and the batter runner must touch 1st base. The other runners do not matter and the game is over. The security guard picking up the ball and the appeals are a mute point..... the game is over! What is so hard to understand? Why all the what if this and that?

[MD Longhorn]

Ozzy... if the security guard doesn't get the ball (killing play)... and it's just a fielder relaying the ball in...

The force out at 2nd (after all, this is just a batted ball, and fielders got the ball to 2nd before the runner got there ... admittedly slowly - but that's really irrelevant) would nullify any run (if that out was the 3rd out... something that is not entirely clear from the OP).

2 outs, bases loaded. Ball hit to F7 on the ground, who fields it cleanly, and notices the runner from first has fallen to the ground injured - so throws it to 2nd after BR passes first, and after R1 touches home... this is a force out - no run. The OP (If the security guard doesn't get the ball) is no different.

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

I don't see what the confusion in this video is all about. In OBR, the lead runner must advance and touch home and the batter runner must touch 1st base. The other runners do not matter and the game is over. The security guard picking up the ball and the appeals are a mute point..... the game is over! What is so hard to understand? Why all the what if this and that?

On a batted ball you are incorrect. Or do you think the Wendelstedt school is wrong?

[bwburke94]

According to Wendelstedt, the appeal at third base was a force because the runner was forced at the time he "missed" the base. Provided that both appeals were valid, the run should not have scored.

[DG]

After a re-read of MLBUM 4.11 and OBR 5.08, and searching out Wendlestedt's explanation I have come to the conclusion that the words "shall not declare the game ended until" is quite different than "the game ends when". Wendlestedt is clear (p 78) that runners "will be required to advance and touch their next base in order for the game to be ended."

[soundedlikeastrike]

Reminds me of one those: "Ever body knows that commercials.."
That's what a walk off looks like.
Out field in, over your head or just to deep, we give.
Quite common.

I don't like his explanation, but they got it right.

From NBC:
Umpire Larry Varner provided an official explanation after the game:

“There are two or three different rules that come into play in game-ending type situations. Now you’re talking about appealing bases. 4.09(b) talks about how a run scores and it also gets tied into game-ending situations. Let’s say the bases are loaded and you get ball four. The guy on third has to come and score and the batter has to go and touch first. If they don’t fulfill those two obligations, someone can be called out for that and the game continues with two outs. We didn’t have that situation, but that’s what they were asking. Then they were asking, ‘Can we throw it around and tag all the bases and get force outs?’ In that situation you can’t. First of all, they didn’t play the ball. The infielders were leaving the infield. The runner from third touched the plate and the runner from the plate touched first. Those two things right there met the obligation of the rule. When that run scores and the batter has touched first, the game’s over.”

[Welpe]

Sounds like those MLB umpires better go back to Wendelstedt.

I wonder if MLB came out with an official interp internally?