tie goes to the runner?

[Skip Sturgeon]

If a play at base is too close to call, does a tie go to the runner? This seems to be the case in our league(6-8yr.olds) , but I can't imagine it is a written rule. We had several "coaches"(Dads) debate this the other night.Who's right?

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by Skip Sturgeon
If a play at base is too close to call, does a tie go to the runner? This seems to be the case in our league(6-8yr.olds) , but I can't imagine it is a written rule. We had several "coaches"(Dads) debate this the other night.Who's right?

No-one. "There are no 'ties' in baseball" is a common response.

Experienced officials usually prefer to use the term "benefit of the doubt".

Most umpires I know in adult leagues will give the benefit of any doubt to the fielder when a runner is attempting to advance or retreat on the base paths.

Most umpires I know in adult leagues will give the benefit of any doubt to the runner on a tag up or pick off attempt.

Those two alledged "tie-breaking" judgements may appear arbitrary, but they are actually judgement decisions carefully informed by the reality of each situation in the light of the official rules and their professional interpretations.

As for debating the pro's and con's of who gets the benefit of a perceived tie in a game for 6-8 year olds, I'm afraid I simply can't imagine the relevance. Maybe someone else can enlighten us both.

Hope this helps

Cheers

[ozzy6900]

Originally posted by Skip Sturgeon
If a play at base is too close to call, does a tie go to the runner? This seems to be the case in our league(6-8yr.olds) , but I can't imagine it is a written rule. We had several "coaches"(Dads) debate this the other night.Who's right?

I'm sorry to tell you this but the tie goes to the umpire!

[SC Ump]

Originally posted by Skip Sturgeon
If a play at base is too close to call...

Really? Have you had this happen? I think I'll try that next time. "Well, Coach, I just don't know. That was too close to call."

(Just funnin' you a little.)

Here's the rules as per NFHS

7.01 A runner requires the right to a base when he acquires it before being put out.

7.07 Any runner is out when - (e) failing to reach the next base before a fielder tags said runner or the base...

7.01 states the runner must be there "before" the out to be safe. 7.07 states the runner is out if not there "before" being tagged. Hence a tie would be an out.

(However, I seem to remember that the section for the batter-runner stated it in reverse, making a tie on the batter-runner resulting in a safe call. In looking for that rule right now, I could not find it.)

The important thing to remember is that just because the call was too close for the coaches in the dugout and the fans in the stands to all reach mutual consensus, it was not too close to call. Umpires are taught that there are no ties, a decision must be made on whether the runner or the ball was there first.

[jicecone]

"As for debating the pro's and con's of who gets the benefit of a perceived tie in a game for 6-8 year olds, I'm afraid I simply can't imagine the relevance. Maybe someone else can enlighten us both."

I agree with you Warren however, if we take the oppurtunity to educate the 6-8 yr old parents now, mabey, just mabey, they wont be yelling the same thing when the players are 15-16.

Skip, the rules of Baseball do NOT allow for ties. The runner either beats the ball to the bag or they don't. Most of the time, the official makes their decision based on this criteria alone.

Now, as Warren has already explained, officials also take into consideration other things that are used in their decisions.

[nine01c]

"Bangers" (aka "whackers") are OUTS!

[Bfair]

Most experienced officials I know have abandoned the misconceived rookie concept of "when in doubt, they're out", and they have learned to "reward the better play" ---should doubt exist in their mind on a force or tag play.

That is, if the defense on a force play has played it cleanly (no drops, bobbles, etc) then they will make the runner prove that he beat the throw. IOW, tie then goes to the defense. That also applies to great diving plays, etc that would normally go for hits but did not due to excellent defensive plays. Even when those balls are not cleanly caught, it is still excellent play to stop the hit, and the defense will receive benefit of doubt when it's so close that the official is uncertain of safe or out. The defense has properly done everything they can do to attempt to retire the runner, and they made it so close that the official still has doubt. The defense has earned the benefit of doubt.

However, if the defense bobbles a routine ball or plays it lackadaisically, then they'll make the defense prove to them that they beat the runner with their play. The defense has now given the benefit of doubt to the offense through their below average play.

The same is true on tag plays.
When the throw beats the runner, it's up to the runner to prove that he gets around the tag. The official needs to see a definite missed tag for a safe call---even if his angle doesn't provide that a definite tag actually occurred. Likewise, when the throw is poor or late---causing a swipe or chase tag---then the defense better prove that they got that tag on the runner in order to earn the out.

That doesn't mean that all close calls are decided by that criteria.
Plays can be close yet still be without doubt in the official's mind.
That is, a fielder could bobble a groundball, ultimately resulting with a close play at 1B, yet still gain the out if the official is certain the ball beat the runner. Likewise, the defense could make a great diving stop resulting in a close play, but if the official is certain the runner is safe that should be his call---despite the great defensive play. Only when there is doubt in the official's mind does the criteria of rewarding the better play become a factor.


Freix

[St. Louis Blue]

I use the same type of evaluation as Bfair indicated above. I have noted that the MLB umpires seem to subscribe to this theory. A very close call on a great play by the defense almost always results in an out call.

In discussing this topic of "tie goes to the ..." I think there is a distinction to be made in what we mean by a tie.
It is a physical reality that on some plays the ball will arrive in the glove at the exact same instant as the foot touches the bag. This is by defination a tie. The problem lies with the fact that the baseball rules (or softball for that matter) do not recognize the concept of a tie. Since the rules we play under do not recognize a tie as existing, in the context of the game played under these rules, a tie does not exist. We are presented with the same type of situation we encounter with a true/false question where the question is not sufficiently defined so as to make a proper and correct determination as to which answer is correct. We are then forced to use our experience and what data is available to decide which of the two possible answers is most correct. You as an umpire may think it was a tie in your mind but "tie goes to the runner" is not an acceptable reason for your final decision as to safe or out.

Early in my umpiring career, I used to think in these terms, but now I use all of the available data (see Bfair's comment) and make my decision based on those. Using the tie goes ... logic is merely a crutch.

Just my opinion
Gordon Raney

[nine01c]

Originally posted by Bfair
Most experienced officials I know have abandoned the misconceived rookie concept of "when in doubt, they're out", and they have learned to "reward the better play" ---should doubt exist in their mind on a force or tag play.

Unfortunately, I have not reached your superior status as an "experienced" official, so please pardon my misconceived rookie notions. However, I never said anything about "doubt." I said "bangers are OUTS," no doubt. My vision of a banger is a clean play where runner and ball arrive at the "same" time. I agree that on a questionable play (swipe tag, pulled foot, etc.) you have to take into consideration the entire sequence of what happened. The college umpires I have been working with don't want to see these routine "bang-bang ties" called SAFE. I didn't mean to confuse such a play with one resulting in doubt.

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by Bfair
Most experienced officials I know have abandoned the misconceived rookie concept of "when in doubt, they're out", and they have learned to "reward the better play" ---should doubt exist in their mind on a force or tag play.

Umpires are supposed to be IMPARTIAL ARBITERS of what happened. They are NOT there to "reward the better play" or to penalize what they perceive may have been a defensive error.

Originally posted by Bfair
Only when there is doubt in the official's mind does the criteria of rewarding the better play become a factor.

It should NEVER be a factor in an official's decision-making. If a play is so close that you have doubt, then the facts say the runner did NOT beat the play. That is the criterion the pro's use. That is what the rules require.

To use some arbitrary personal judgement about the quality of play has NOTHING to do with being an "experienced official" and EVERYTHING to do with being overly impressed with your own part in the game. Umpires are NOT the leading players in the baseball drama. Please re-read OBR 9.01 over and over again until that finally slides home.

Hope this helps (really)

Cheers

[MD Longhorn]

I too cannot believe what I'm reading. Call what you see. What happens beforehand should not be a factor.

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by St. Louis Blue
I use the same type of evaluation as Bfair indicated above. I have noted that the MLB umpires seem to subscribe to this theory. A very close call on a great play by the defense almost always results in an out call.

With all due respect, St Louis Blue, your conclusion about the criterion being used in MLB baseball is not valid unless you can also establish that a "very close call" that is accompanied by a poor play by the defense "almost always" results in a safe call.

If questioned I think most pro officials would respond that they declare such close calls for the defense because the runner didn't beat the play to the base. That is NOT because of any arbitrary tenet such as "If in doubt, call them out" but rather because the rules actually require a result that goes that way, and the facts of science that say baseballs travel faster than runners.

Hope this helps

Cheers

[Edited by Warren Willson on Sep 23rd, 2003 at 04:12 PM]

[chuckfan1]

I like a lot of what St Louis Blue has to say. Continuing it further, and for FUN, almost virtually impossible to be, in fact, a tie.
So, having prefaced with that, for debates sake, say, you hear glove, and see foot at the exact same time. Call it a "tie" if you wish, whatever.
My theory is this. BR is safe. To be out, ball has to BEAT runner to F3. The ball getting to F3 BEFORE BR. If a BR is safe by three steps because the ball did not BEAT him to the bag, he should be safe under the same criteria if the ball doesnt beat him to the bag on a "tie".
If the BR hits the bag at the same time the ball arrives, the throw didnt beat him, safe.
Defensive player makes a great play? So. What about the BR who makes a great effort to get down the line.
This was "for fun" topic so all of you 90-yr veteran guys, save your emails. Ive called them, the same way, about great plays by the defense, etc.
Just a way of looking at it.

[Cubbies87]

Originally posted by chuckfan1
My theory is this. BR is safe. To be out, ball has to BEAT runner to F3.

That is not a theory. A theory is something that is believed to be true, but cannot be proved. Problem is, that theory has already been proved false.

The rules of baseball are written in order to regulate the play of the game. They are the law. Nothing is above the law. The rules of baseball state that the runner must beat the ball to the bag, and not vice-versa.

But, whoever wants to subscribe to this theorem may do so, with the knowledge that they are going against the rules of baseball.

Also, as stated before, the way the play unfolded has nothing to do with the way the play is called. If the runner does not beat the ball to the bag, the runner is out. Period. I don't care if the shortstop leaped 15ft. in the air, snagging a ball that was headed out of the stadium. If the ball does not beat the runner, I have one thing, and only one thing in mind: "OUT!"

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Originally posted by chuckfan1
say, you hear glove, and see foot at the exact same time. Call it a "tie" if you wish, whatever.
My theory is this. BR is safe. To be out, ball has to BEAT runner to F3.

But the rule says it the other way... The runner must beat the ball.

Your contrary/complimentary statement only confounds the issue of the tie. The rule says the runner must beat the ball... if the runner doesn't beat the ball, they should be called out.