The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Baseball (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/)
-   -   2-runners....1 base (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/13033-2-runners-1-base.html)

gumpire Thu Apr 01, 2004 09:16pm

Runners on 1st and 2nd....batter hits the ball to shallow left field (where it is not caught)....runner occupying 1st advances, runner at 2nd stays....both runners are on 2nd at the same time.
Front runner is out, no tag, no need to touch 3rd. Do you agree?
My thinking is that this is similar to the infield fly rule and the runner will definitely be out, so why slow the game down with the formality?

DG Thu Apr 01, 2004 09:26pm

No, I don't agree. Runner on 2B is forced to third. He must be tagged out, or the ball must be thrown to 3B and the base tagged to record an out. If neither happens, and I am on bases, then me and my partner just stand around until something happens, ever how long it takes. It won't take long for the defense to do something.

If I followed your "he's gonna be out anyway so why waste time" analogy I could go ahead and call three strikes when an obvious inferior batter steps in against an obvious superior pitcher. It just don't work that way. You got to play the game....

gumpire Thu Apr 01, 2004 11:17pm

2-runners....1 base
 
Well, I researched this further after posting it and found that according to Rule 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."
But then Rule 7.03 says:
"Two runners may not occupy a base, but if, while the ball is alive, two runners are touching a base, the following runner shall be out when tagged. The preceding runner is entitled to the base."
http://www.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/of...s/runner_7.jsp
And for those of you following FED rules, they say the same thing.
http://www.eteamz.com/baseball/rules.../index.cfm?m=1,2,3,4,5
It seems these rule are in conflict.
And, DG, while I respect and appreciate your comment, why do we have an infield fly rule in we are not making some ruling in anticipation of inevitable actions?
Comments, everyone, please?


[Edited by gumpire on Apr 1st, 2004 at 10:36 PM]

Rich Ives Thu Apr 01, 2004 11:38pm

Re: 2-runners....1 base
 
Quote:

Originally posted by gumpire
Well, I researched this further after posting it and found that according to Rule 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."
But then Rule 7.03 says:
"Two runners may not occupy a base, but if, while the ball is alive, two runners are touching a base, the following runner shall be out when tagged. The preceding runner is entitled to the base."
http://www.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/of...s/runner_7.jsp
It seems these rule are in conflict.
And, DG, while I respect and appreciate your comment, why do we have an infield fly rule in we are not making some ruling in anticipation of inevitable actions?
Comments, everyone, please?

Baseball rules were written by people who know baseball, for people who know baseball. Therefore, though they seem to sometimes not make sense, the baseball community knows, for the most part, what they mean. This is one where "they" know what it means.

But to further amplify:


Add 2.00 Force play: "A FORCE PLAY is a play in which a runner <b>legally loses his right to occupy a base</b> by reason of the batter becoming a runner."

So per 2.00 he lost his right to occupy the base.

Per 7.01 he is no longer entitled to it because the folowing runner gained the right.

Bottom line, he lost the right to be there and the following runner gained the right to be there. Therefore, the runner NOT entitled to be there is the one who is out.

In layman's terms, you were evicted from your apartment. The new tennant signed a lease. When he arrives, you are still there. When the sheriff shows up, you will be the one removed from the scene.

Hope this helps.

gumpire Thu Apr 01, 2004 11:45pm

Rich,
That's in direct contrast to the rule. The rule states that the following runner shall be outr when tageed. The base belongs to the proceeding runner.
Again, we get back to the original issue, someone is out; who, and is a tag (or touching of base if a force) required?
In this case, I called the front runner out, the plate umpire overruled me on the spot (which he does not have the authority to do as I understand it).

DG Fri Apr 02, 2004 12:57am

The rules stated are not in conflict. The following runner is out when tagged only when he is not forced. Otherwise the runner already on the base has posssession. In example given, force is in effect, since ball was not caught in left field.

The reason we have an infield fly rule, to call a batter out for inevevitable action, is to prevent the defense from an unfair advantage, ie a double play. Consider a major league infielder (or little league infielder), who would be allowed to intentionally let a routine fly ball to fall to the ground. A double play would be inevitable. We are not making the infield fly ruling just because the catch is imminent, to speed the game along, but to protect the offense from an action that has been deemed to be innappropriate by the baseball rules makers.

Now, on a separate subject you mention, I would have issues with a partner who overrules my call "on the spot", without any discussion with me. I have no problem with a partner who has information about a play and after discussion I have the opportunity to change my call. But a partner who reverses me without discussion is a poor partner that I will need to have a serious post game discussion with.

Rich Fri Apr 02, 2004 08:44am

Quote:

Originally posted by gumpire
Rich,
That's in direct contrast to the rule. The rule states that the following runner shall be outr when tageed. The base belongs to the proceeding runner.
Again, we get back to the original issue, someone is out; who, and is a tag (or touching of base if a force) required?
In this case, I called the front runner out, the plate umpire overruled me on the spot (which he does not have the authority to do as I understand it).

I certainly wouldn't do that. But I would be calling time and coming to you for a conversation.

There is no conflict in the rules.

A force play is a play where a runner (or runners) is forced to advance by a batter-runner. R2 is forced to advance to third.

If you're working HS ball, 8-2-7 NOTE is quite clear that a forced runner can be tagged out while on his original base.

Once a force situation is in place, the original runner on that base is no longer legally entitled to that base -- he's been forced from the base.

You can't equate this situation with the Infield Fly rule. That rule has a specific purpose -- to protect runners from an unfair double play situation. In your situation, because of the force, the lead runner is out when tagged. The runner on first base is forced to second by the batted ball -- surely he's not going to be out.

The baseball rules are full of contradictions, BTW. Rick Roder, a for professional umpire, has written a book containing over 100 of these contradictions. In order to change the professional rulebook (OBR), the players union must agree to the changes. Therefore, it rarely gets changed.

So the first thing a newer umpire needs to do is understand the rules, but in a way that apply to game situations.

The rule that says that the lead runner is entitled to a base when two occupy is quite important, however the rules concerning a force play have to trump that rule here. Contradiction? Maybe. The way it is? Yup.

And if the defense wants to leave two runners on a base and pitch to the next batter? Let them. Nothing in the rules forbids it.

--Rich

Tim C Fri Apr 02, 2004 09:20am

ô¡ô

[Edited by Tim C on Apr 7th, 2004 at 09:27 AM]

gumpire Fri Apr 02, 2004 12:55pm

Wow to 5 run HR!!!!
Thank you all, I appreciate the information!!!

gumpire Fri Apr 02, 2004 01:27pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Tim C
"And if the defense wants to leave two runners on a base and pitch to the next batter? Let them. Nothing in the rules forbids it."

-----

Yep, and this understanding is why the late John McSherry witnessed a FIVE RUN home run when working a game in the International League as a AAA umpire.

Tee

So, Rule 7.03 where it says "Two runners may not occupy a base..." doesn't forbid 2 runners on a base?

Tim C Fri Apr 02, 2004 02:00pm

My Oh My, its Grand Salami Time
 
ô¡ô

[Edited by Tim C on Apr 7th, 2004 at 09:27 AM]

Rich Fri Apr 02, 2004 02:07pm

Re: My Oh My, its Grand Salami Time
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tim C
While the rule is clear it takes a defensive action to cause the out.

As Rich stated earlier if the defense does not make a play (i.e. start taggin everyone) there is no direction in the rule to call anyone out.

This could fall along the lines of umpires not knowing penalities such as what occurs in a real baseball game when a batter throws his bat.

Tee

This is another case of being able to read but not comprehending what is read.

Even if there are two runners standing on the base, only one legally occupies it. In other words, if you tag both runners standing on the base, one WILL be out.

7.03 is a rule that, in essence, means that a base is not necessarily a safe haven for a base runner. A runner can be put out, even if standing on a base.

--Rich

greymule Fri Apr 02, 2004 11:26pm

If the defense really wanted to be perverse and the offense complied, they could load up the bases with 3 guys on 3B, 3 guys on 2B, and 2 guys on 1B. So the batter could hit a nine-run homer.

It <i>could</i> happen!

gumpire Sat Apr 03, 2004 02:53pm

Re: Re: My Oh My, its Grand Salami Time
 
Quote:

This is another case of being able to read but not comprehending what is read.[/B]
Rich, no need to get sh!tty about it!! It was a question and I thought that was the point of this forum.

OTHERWISE, thank you to all (including you Rich), I greatly appreciate it.

DG Sat Apr 03, 2004 06:36pm

I don't know why the defense would not want to make some kind of play if two runners are on the same base. After all, the mission of the defense is to get outs without allowing runs to score.

Tim C Sat Apr 03, 2004 06:41pm

ô¡ô

[Edited by Tim C on Apr 7th, 2004 at 09:28 AM]

gumpire Sat Apr 03, 2004 09:21pm

Last thought
 
One last thought from me on this....who needs to be tagged and/or is there a force at 3B?
Thanks again to all.

Rich Ives Sat Apr 03, 2004 10:54pm

IT'S A FORCE PLAY. TAG EITHER R2 OR 3B.

Tim C Sun Apr 04, 2004 12:14am

ô¡ô

[Edited by Tim C on Apr 7th, 2004 at 09:28 AM]

gumpire Sun Apr 04, 2004 01:45pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Tim C
You really don't get it, do you?

Lah Me!

Tee
[/B]
Sorry, I don't get it.....why would R2 be out under any circumstance? If R1 is forced to 3B, how can he stay on 2B and make R2 vulnerable?

If the issue that I'm raising bothers you, I don't know what to say!! Everyone here seems to give a slightly different answer to the original question, and that proves my point that the issue is unclear!

I have to say, yet again, that someone is going to be out....instead of everyone (defense, offense, and umps)hanging around trying to figure out whose vulerable, who's safe, etc., why not just call the front runner (R1) out?


[Edited by gumpire on Apr 4th, 2004 at 01:54 PM]

Tim C Sun Apr 04, 2004 02:54pm

ô¡ô

[Edited by Tim C on Apr 7th, 2004 at 09:29 AM]

Rich Sun Apr 04, 2004 03:18pm

Quote:

Originally posted by gumpire
Quote:

Originally posted by Tim C
You really don't get it, do you?

Lah Me!

Tee
Sorry, I don't get it.....why would R2 be out under any circumstance? If R1 is forced to 3B, how can he stay on 2B and make R2 vulnerable?

If the issue that I'm raising bothers you, I don't know what to say!! Everyone here seems to give a slightly different answer to the original question, and that proves my point that the issue is unclear!

I have to say, yet again, that someone is going to be out....instead of everyone (defense, offense, and umps)hanging around trying to figure out whose vulerable, who's safe, etc., why not just call the front runner (R1) out?


[Edited by gumpire on Apr 4th, 2004 at 01:54 PM] [/B]
Because the situations are different. If the lead runner's not forced off the base by a batted ball, he's entitled to stay there. Then the other runner, when tagged would be out, but you could tag the lead runner out as much as you want and he would not be out.

You simply can't make things up. And opinions mean little -- the rules (properly read and interpreted) are what matter.

gumpire Sun Apr 04, 2004 06:53pm

The lead runner was forced off the base....therefore he was vulnerable to be put out whether he left the base or not!!! I got all that....

The question remains, can they both stand on the base? The OBR says they cannot, so when they're both standing there and nothing is happenning, someone needs to make something happen!

Since the offense wasn't moving, the defense didn't know what the H was going on, I called the lead runner out!

So, why such an argument about "I don't get it"? I get it just fine...I simply wanted to know if you thought a tag was necessary....we can't seem to resolve that issue!

I have seen several posts on here (including in this thread) where people want to refer to the fact that the rules aren't clear on what to do (i.e., thrown bat, etc.) and not seen where anyone tells that person they don't get it.

So just relax and look at the facts, and please, stop just trying to prove me wrong and answer the initial question.

As far as my comparison to the infield fly rule, I was told that the intention was to prevent defense from gaining an unfair advantage..same thing here. If I'm defense and I can leave 2 guys on every base...you can bet I will!!! That's 6 runners and 1 batter I can get out all on the same play!!!! Triple play, nothing!!!!

Rich Ives Sun Apr 04, 2004 07:28pm

"Since the offense wasn't moving, the defense didn't know what the H was going on, I called the lead runner out!""

YOU CAN'T DO THAT! THE DEFENSE HAS TO ACT!

If the defense chooses to not make a play, just let them stand there. It's not your job to fix it.

The lightbulb will eventually go on in someone's head (but don't let it be yours) - then all he** will break loose.

Tim C Sun Apr 04, 2004 07:30pm

ô¡ô



[Edited by Tim C on Apr 7th, 2004 at 09:29 AM]

DG Sun Apr 04, 2004 07:38pm

7.03 says two runners can not occupy a base, but there is no penalty listed. The penalty, of course, is when the defense tags the one who does not belong there. There is no advantage to the defense to leave 2 runners on a base on purpose, so it is not the same as the protection provided by the infield fly rule. For example, if the defense left a runner on each base, they could be subject to a 7 run homer, or a 6 run base hit. This is not an advantage. The defense is out there to retire the side, without runs being scored if possible.

While leaving 2 runners on base is possible, I have never seen it, and as I mentioned earlier, I would stand there looking at both of them until the defense made a play. They will figure it out. There is no reason for calling one of them out until the defense makes the play.

bob jenkins Sun Apr 04, 2004 08:06pm

Quote:

Originally posted by gumpire
Sorry, I don't get it.....why would R2 be out under any circumstance? If R1 is forced to 3B, how can he stay on 2B and make R2 vulnerable?


Part of the confusion might be over the abbreviation -- for everyone EXCEPT FED, R1 is the runner who starts on first, R2 on second, R3 on third.

So, in the play at hand, R2 is forced to third. That's why he's out when he's tagged (or when third is tagged).


gumpire Sun Apr 04, 2004 08:39pm

THANK YOU ALL!!!! I appreciate the information and look forward to participating more!!!!!

BoomerSooner Mon Apr 05, 2004 03:15am

Could you not, given a decent amount of time, call the runner out for abandonement. Just a thought. I would avoid it and just wait for the defense to get with the program, but its a possibility.

bob jenkins Mon Apr 05, 2004 07:52am

Quote:

Originally posted by BoomerSooner
Could you not, given a decent amount of time, call the runner out for abandonement. Just a thought. I would avoid it and just wait for the defense to get with the program, but its a possibility.
How has the runner "abandoned"?


Tim C Mon Apr 05, 2004 08:01am

ô¡ô

[Edited by Tim C on Apr 7th, 2004 at 09:29 AM]

blarson Mon Apr 05, 2004 12:23pm

Re: 2-runners....1 base
 
Quote:

[i] why do we have an infield fly rule in we are not making some ruling in anticipation of inevitable actions?
Comments, everyone, please?


[Edited by gumpire on Apr 1st, 2004 at 10:36 PM] [/B]
You are not ruling on the inevitable catch. Your preventing the defense form letting the ball fall untouched and gaining a cheap DP.

Bob

mcrowder Mon Apr 05, 2004 03:24pm

5-run homers? 9-run homers?

There's no way, in a situation like this, I'm letting a batter come to the plate. The play is not over. If defense doesn't know what the H is going on, I'm telling the batter not to get into the box. Eventually, something will happen. You can't just call him out, but you can't allow a pitch to occur to a further batter.

To answer your initial question - yes, a tag (or a force at 3rd) is required.

gumpire Mon Apr 05, 2004 03:38pm

For the fun of the debate....

2 runners left on 2B makes for an easy double play at 3B. i.e., ball's hit to SS, throw to 3B, tag the base, 2-out!!!!

gumpire Tue Apr 06, 2004 02:45pm

Hey, what about OBR Rules 7.09(e) and 7.08(a(2))?
I think both of these would be justification for calling the preceeding runner out.
Comments?

Rich Tue Apr 06, 2004 02:52pm

Quote:

Originally posted by gumpire
Hey, what about OBR Rules 7.09(e) and 7.08(a(2))?
I think both of these would be justification for calling the preceeding runner out.
Comments?

7.09(e) doesn't refer to baserunners, but to non-participating members of the offensive team.

Regarding 7.08a2: How does a runner leave the baseline in this situation?

Why can't you simply accept what you've heard rather than trying to justify what you'd LIKE to be correct?

gumpire Tue Apr 06, 2004 03:12pm

[/B][/QUOTE]

7.09(e) doesn't refer to baserunners, but to non-participating members of the offensive team.

Regarding 7.08a2: How does a runner leave the baseline in this situation?

Why can't you simply accept what you've heard rather than trying to justify what you'd LIKE to be correct? [/B][/QUOTE]

Where does 7.09(e) refer to "non-participating members..."?
I'll post it here for you all to read....then, if you still have questions, please let me know.

Rule 7.09(e): "ANY MEMBER or members of the offensive team stand or gather around any base to which a runner is advancing, to confuse, hinder or add to the difficulty of the fielders. Such runner shall be declared out for the interference of his teammate or teammates."

and as far as 7.08(a(2)), it discusses "abandoning his effort to touch the next base"....I think strating on 2B, with no movement (or even apparent knowledge that you are forced to) towards 3B, meets that definition at some point.

A big part of the issue I'm having, is that I have not heard anyone be able to tell me their justification for the runner NOT being out, while I've given several possible scenarios where he IS out.


[Edited by gumpire on Apr 6th, 2004 at 04:17 PM]

Rich Tue Apr 06, 2004 03:22pm

Quote:

Originally posted by gumpire
7.09(e) doesn't refer to baserunners, but to non-participating members of the offensive team.

Regarding 7.08a2: How does a runner leave the baseline in this situation?

Why can't you simply accept what you've heard rather than trying to justify what you'd LIKE to be correct? [/B][/QUOTE]

Where does 7.09(e) refer to "non-participating members..."?
I'll post it here for you all to read....then, if you still have questions, please let me know.

Rule 7.09(e): "ANY MEMBER or members of the offensive team stand or gather around any base to which a runner is advancing, to confuse, hinder or add to the difficulty of the fielders. Such runner shall be declared out for the interference of his teammate or teammates."

and as far as 7.08(a(2)), it discusses "abandoning his effort to touch the next base"....I think strating on 2B, with no movement (or even apparent knowledge that you are forced to) towards 3B, meets that definition at some point.

A big part of the issue I'm having, is that I have not heard anyone be able to tell me their justification for the runner NOT being out, while I've given several possible scenarios where he IS out.


[Edited by gumpire on Apr 6th, 2004 at 04:17 PM] [/B][/QUOTE]

It means what I said it means. People smarter than me have interpreted the rules and made these decisions. Call what you want to call. I'm done trying to help you. BTW, you left out the part about leaving the baseline in 7.08a2.

gumpire Tue Apr 06, 2004 04:15pm

Quote:

It means what I said it means. People smarter than me have interpreted the rules and made these decisions. Call what you want to call. I'm done trying to help you. BTW, you left out the part about leaving the baseline in 7.08a2. [/B]
So how are you related to Alexander Cartwright, Rich?
I don't know who YOU are (Commisioner of Baseball, President of Little League, Umpire-In-Chief for North America, Alexander Cartwright reincarnate, etc.)so why should I accept it means what you say it means and not what I say it means? Give me some reference, that's all I ask.

Leaving the baseline is not the point of the rule. The point is abandonning the effort to touch the next base. I think all will agree, that is the spirit of the rule. Since rules don't cover all conceivablities, we have to make decissions based upon "the spirit of the rule".

[Edited by gumpire on Apr 6th, 2004 at 05:31 PM]

Rich Ives Tue Apr 06, 2004 06:42pm

<i>7.08 Any runner is out when_
a) 2) after touching first base, he <b>leaves the baseline</b>, obviously abandoning his effort to touch the next base;</i>

Just what part of "leaves the baseline" is so hard to understand?

BTW, any runner on 2B HAS touched first base.

gumpire Tue Apr 06, 2004 07:16pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Rich Ives
<i>7.08 Any runner is out when_
a) 2) after touching first base, he <b>leaves the baseline</b>, obviously abandoning his effort to touch the next base;</i>

Just what part of "leaves the baseline" is so hard to understand?

BTW, any runner on 2B HAS touched first base.

READ THE WHOLE THING:
2) after touching first base, he leaves the baseline, obviously abandoning his effort to touch the next base; Any runner after reaching first base who leaves the baseline heading for his dugout or his position believing that there is no further play, may be declared out if the umpire judges the act of the runner to be considered abandoning his efforts to run the bases. Even though an out is called, the ball remains in play in regard to any other runner. This rule also covers the following and similar plays: Less than two out, score tied last of ninth inning, runner on first, batter hits a ball out of park for winning run, the runner on first passes second and thinking the home run automatically wins the game, cuts across diamond toward his bench as batter runner circles bases. In this case, the base runner would be called out "for abandoning his effort to touch the next base" and batter runner permitted to continue around bases to make his home run valid. If there are two out, home run would not count (see Rule 7.12). This is not an appeal play. PLAY. Runner believing he is called out on a tag at first or third base starts for the dugout and progresses a reasonable distance still indicating by his actions that he is out, shall be declared out for abandoning the bases. In the above two plays the runners are CONSIDERED actually abandoning their base paths and are treated differently than the batter who struck out as described.

I read that, that you don't necessarily have to leave the base path...also, the prerequisite here is the UMPIRE may judge the act to be considered abandoning.

And finally, OBR 9.01(c) gives "Each umpire has authority to rule on any point not specifically covered in these rules." So, until someone tells me where it's "specifically covered" in the rules....I stand behind my decision.

Everyones got an opinion...who has something to back it up?



[Edited by gumpire on Apr 6th, 2004 at 08:30 PM]

Rich Ives Tue Apr 06, 2004 08:08pm

<i> read that, that you don't necessarily have to leave the base path...</i>

Then you need an English language course and we're outa here.

Have fun at the protest committee meetings.

gumpire Tue Apr 06, 2004 08:30pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Rich Ives
<i> read that, that you don't necessarily have to leave the base path...</i>

Then you need an English language course and we're outa here.

Have fun at the protest committee meetings.

"outa" is excellent English...do you have a degree? Or do you just choose to ignore everything except a way to try to put someone down?

You are the biggest culprit in sharing your opinion with NO supporting facts. When you can provide some, please feel free to rejoin the conversation.

gumpire Tue Apr 06, 2004 08:32pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Rich Ives
<i>7.08 Any runner is out when_
a) 2) after touching first base, he <b>leaves the baseline</b>, obviously abandoning his effort to touch the next base;</i>

Just what part of "leaves the baseline" is so hard to understand?

BTW, any runner on 2B HAS touched first base.

If everything is to be taken so literally, this runner was not supposed to be touching first base, he had already done that and was touching second, supposed to be going to 3B, English major!

gumpire Tue Apr 06, 2004 08:42pm

Quote:

Originally posted by gumpire
OBR 9.01(c) gives "Each umpire has authority to rule on any point not specifically covered in these rules." [/B]
Maybe you can tell me what part of this rule is so hard for all of you understand?

Rich Tue Apr 06, 2004 11:02pm

Quote:

Originally posted by gumpire
Quote:

Originally posted by gumpire
OBR 9.01(c) gives "Each umpire has authority to rule on any point not specifically covered in these rules."
Maybe you can tell me what part of this rule is so hard for all of you understand? [/B]
I hope you enjoy talking to yourself, cause I'm thinking that's what you're going to get from this point forward from most of us.

bob jenkins Wed Apr 07, 2004 08:08am

Quote:

Originally posted by gumpire
Quote:

Originally posted by gumpire
OBR 9.01(c) gives "Each umpire has authority to rule on any point not specifically covered in these rules."
Maybe you can tell me what part of this rule is so hard for all of you understand? [/B]
I'll try, once (w/o specific references):

"Each runner is entitled to the base he occupies ..." (I'll get to the ellipses in a minute): So, just reading this, what do we do if two runners are on the base?

"If two runners occupy a base, the base belongs to the leading runner": That answers that question.

"... (continuing from above) until he is forced to vacate it": An exception to the trailing runner rule above -- if a runner is forced, he can't safely occupy a base*.

"A runner is out for abandonment when he leaves the baseline": First, "leaves" is an active verb -- the runner must do something. Second, if you're going to call him out for abandonment when he's on the base, you're going to have to call every runner who is on second out -- you've already declared that part of the field to be "abandonment". Third, some "authoritative sources" (perhaps Evans or J/R, for example -- I don't have the specifics here) indicate not to call abandonment until the runner reaches foul territory.

""Each umpire has authority to rule on any point not specifically covered in these rules." : This play is specifically covered in the rules, although you might need to put a couple of rules together.

*Play: R1 only. B1 grounds to F3. For some reason R1 retreats to the base. F3 (a) tags R1, then steps on first; or (b) steps on first then tags R1. Ruling: (a) Double play. R1 was forced from the base, so he's out when tagged, even though he was touching the base at the time he was tagged (I'm sure you can see how this applies to the play at hand). (b) B1 is out, R1 remains at first -- the force was removed when the base was tagged, so R1 is again able to "legally occupy" first.

gumpire Wed Apr 07, 2004 12:50pm

Bob; I have ZERO problem following or agreeing with your example. However, in my question/example, the runner did not begin to advance or RETURN to the base and the force was not removed.

If the play stands as is, and the next pitch is thrown, what happens then? A double-play at third? If it's a caught fly ball, can both runners on second stay put because the force is removed? What if, on a caught fly ball, the runner on 1st tags up and advances to 2B...can all 3 runners stay there if they like and play continues as if nothings out of the ordinary? Which runner currently on 2B has to tag up on a caught fly ball? Both? The following runner only?

I just firmly believe that something has to be done to prevent all of this potential confusion.

I don't appreciate all the negative comments I've been receiving. I don't think that each and everyone of you would know exactly what to do if this situation occured in a game you were working, so my questioning and debating the issue is an attempt to learn more.

Thank you.

[Edited by gumpire on Apr 7th, 2004 at 02:03 PM]

Tim C Wed Apr 07, 2004 01:38pm

"I don't think that each and everyone of you would know exactly what to do if this situation occured in a game you were working,"

And I disagree. I believe that everyone that tried to help you (Third World Play, or not) actually would know how to handle the situation.

You have helped me very much. I now know how much effort to put into answers of question that you generate.

Tee

bob jenkins Wed Apr 07, 2004 02:01pm

Quote:

Originally posted by gumpire
I don't think that each and everyone of you would know exactly what to do if this situation occured in a game you were working, so my questioning and debating the issue is an attempt to learn more.


If you won't know what to do if the situation arises, then don't let yourself get in that situation.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:30pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1