LITTLE LEAGUE CLARIFICATION - ASAP

[IndianaUmpRef]

Our district starts their 12's championships tonight and I need a clarification. I usually would know something like this, and thought I did, but I need to ask. I do 55-65 high school games a year and then switch to little league in early-mid June every year. So I never really brush up on LL rules as much as I should. Anyway, here it is:

R1 on second base. F1 pitches a passed ball. F2 sees the ball trickle behind his feet. R1 runs to third base. F2 picks up the ball and throws to F5 at third. R1 slides into third and kicks the "breakaway" bag out from the ground and about 5 feet into foul territory. The throw from F2 went into the outfield, where F7 was backing up the play. R1 runs home, F7 throws home to cut down the runner. The runner changes his mind and gets into a pickle between third and home. After a couple throws in the hotbox, R1 decides to slide back into third base, but their is no BASE. Whats the call?

I always ASSUMED this was an automatic dead ball situation because who knows when that base might become in use by a trail runner OR what if the runner must retreat BACK to that base? But, every umpire I talk to gives me a different answer, mostly because a lot of the umpires in our district our high school umps by default. Can someone help me ASAP. I might have some follow-up questions to this if the answer warrants it. Thanks.

[akalsey]

The ball is not dead. The rules say that following runners will be safe if they are touching either the base or the spot where the base was originally anchored. I'd rule that R1 could use either the base or the original spot if he decided to return to that base after passing the base.

See 7.08(c) and the two approved rulings.

[akalsey]

After some thought, I'm wondering where the runner who dislodged a base should go if he passes a base and then returns.

Here's some stuff to ponder...

• The runner slides and breaks loose the bag. He stops where the bag was, but the bag is tossed several feet.
• The runner slides and breaks loose the bag. He slides several feet beyond the location of the bag, carrying the bag with him.
• The runner slides and breaks loose the bag. The bag flies several feet and the runner overslides the location of the bag, ending up touching neither the bag nor the original location of the bag.

The runner is safe in all three situations because approved ruling 1 says no play can be made on the runner if he reached the bag safely. This makes sense, because the runner is expecting the bag to stop their slide. If the bag becomes dislodged, they may not stop, creating the second two situations.

Following runners on the same play get their choice of locations to touch, according to the second approved ruling. This also makes sense. If the bag had only moved a foot up the line, the following runner may not know it had moved, so they are allowed to touch the bag. If the bag was sent several feet, it may be out of reach, so the runner gets to touch the location where the bag is supposed to be.

But the runner who dislodged the base is not a "following runner." So is he accorded the courtesy of approved ruling 2 if he leaves the base?

[DG]

We have to apply common sense, and 9.01(c) if necessary. The purpose of breakaway bags is to prevent breakaway legs. So after one breaks away we have to assume it is still there and play on as if it is. And if the runner going to 3B slides past 3B because the bag broke loose then we have to protect him from being tagged, because if it had not broken loose he may have broken a leg, ie back to the purpose of the breakaway bag. And if after breaking the bag loose he heads home, but returns to the vicinity of where the bag was before it broke loose then he is safe.

[akalsey]

But does he also have the option of going back to the base itself instead of the place the base occupied? My gut says yes, but it's not really backed up by the rules.

Here's what's causing me to doubt my gut...

R2 slides into 3B and knocks it loose 5 feet into foul territory on a direct line from 2B through 3B. R1 would gain no advantage at all from the positioning of that bag. If he comes around to third, a fielder making a play on him just needs to set up where the bag should be in order to make a tag.

But R2 returning to third after heading toward home now has two places to return to. A fielder trying to tag him has to worry about defending two different "bases": the actual bag and the spot the bag originally occupied.

This situation isn't likely to happen, so it may be pointless to discuss it. But it's an interesting excercise.

If the fielder sets up at the 3B to tag the runner, but the runner heads for the bag instead, is the runner leaving the baseline to avoid the tag?

The rules say following runners can go to whichever they choose, but should that be applied to the runner who knocked it loose as well? Would your call change if he's clearly choosing one position over the other in order to avoid a tag?

[DG]

It is an interesting question and it seems ripe for application of 9.01(c). Given that breakaway bags are designed for a purpose and given that 12 year olds are less aware of the rules that are printed vs. the ones that are not, and that we debate on, I would be inclined to allow the runner to return to the original base location, or it's new location, 5 feet from where it used to be. If we have to debate what is correct, how is a 12 year old supposed to know? Benefit of the doubt goes to the runner in this situation, IMO.

[LDUB]

Originally posted by DG
It is an interesting question and it seems ripe for application of 9.01(c). Given that breakaway bags are designed for a purpose and given that 12 year olds are less aware of the rules that are printed vs. the ones that are not, and that we debate on, I would be inclined to allow the runner to return to the original base location, or it's new location, 5 feet from where it used to be. If we have to debate what is correct, how is a 12 year old supposed to know? Benefit of the doubt goes to the runner in this situation, IMO.

This is a simple question covered under rule 7.08 (C).

APPROVED RULING: (2) If a base is dislodged from its position during a play, any following runner on the same play shall be considered as touching or occupying the base if, in the umpire's judgment, he touches or occupies the point marked by the dislodged bag.

So all the runner has to do is touch the spot where the base would be had it not been dislodged. I don't understand why there is so much debate over this subject.

[Edited by LDUB on Jul 5th, 2004 at 10:54 PM]

[akalsey]

So all the runner has to do is touch the spot where the base would be had it not been dislodged. I don't understand why there is so much debate over this subject.

Luke,

I agree that following runners get their choice of spots. In fact, I would probably give considerable leeway to a 12 year old in this instance. If he came to a stop or touched in passing a spot that is reasonably close to where the base is supposed to be, I'd rule that he touched -- even if he missed by a couple of feet.

In any event it would be a good teaching moment for the coach after the play. With my younger teams, I try and explain at least one situation an inning to them. I tell them there's a thousand rules in baseball and the best way to learn them all is to experience them and make a mistake.

But the reason for the question is what happens when it's not the following runner that needs to touch the dislodged base? What if it's the runner who dislodged it? Or even a preceding runner? However unlikely, it could occur that R1 knocks 2B loose and then R2, who hasn't made it to 3B yet needs to come back to 2B. So where does he have to touch?

Is the "following runner" portion of the rule one of Bob's 456 known errors of the OBR? Should it really be any runner?

[DG]

The following runner was not the subject of this post. It was runner who dislodged 3B and then got into a rundown between home and 3B, ultimately returning to 3B, which was not physically where it used to be.

[LDUB]

Originally posted by akalsey
Luke,

I agree that following runners get their choice of spots. In fact, I would probably give considerable leeway to a 12 year old in this instance. If he came to a stop or touched in passing a spot that is reasonably close to where the base is supposed to be, I'd rule that he touched -- even if he missed by a couple of feet.

In any event it would be a good teaching moment for the coach after the play. With my younger teams, I try and explain at least one situation an inning to them. I tell them there's a thousand rules in baseball and the best way to learn them all is to experience them and make a mistake.

But the reason for the question is what happens when it's not the following runner that needs to touch the dislodged base? What if it's the runner who dislodged it? Or even a preceding runner? However unlikely, it could occur that R1 knocks 2B loose and then R2, who hasn't made it to 3B yet needs to come back to 2B. So where does he have to touch?

Is the "following runner" portion of the rule one of Bob's 456 known errors of the OBR? Should it really be any runner?

I just think that this rule is more clear cut than some of you are making it.

APPROVED RULING: (1) If the impact of a runner breaks a base loose from its position, no play can be made on that runner at that base if he had reached the base safely. APPROVED RULING: (2) If a base is dislodged from its position during a play, any following runner on the same play shall be considered as touching or occupying the base if, in the umpire's judgment, he touches or occupies the point marked by the dislodged bag.

Yes I agree that this rule is not written correctly. I think that Ruling 1 should be removed. Then all that needs to be changed is to take Ruling 2 and change following to all.

[DG]

Originally posted by LDUB

I just think that this rule is more clear cut than some of you are making it.

APPROVED RULING: (1) If the impact of a runner breaks a base loose from its position, no play can be made on that runner at that base if he had reached the base safely. APPROVED RULING: (2) If a base is dislodged from its position during a play, any following runner on the same play shall be considered as touching or occupying the base if, in the umpire's judgment, he touches or occupies the point marked by the dislodged bag.

Yes I agree that this rule is not written correctly. I think that Ruling 1 should be removed. Then all that needs to be changed is to take Ruling 2 and change following to all.

The following runner is not the subject of this post.

[LDUB]

Originally posted by DG

The following runner is not the subject of this post.

Telling others that thier response about changing the wording of a rule is not the subject of this post.

[akalsey]

Actually, rulling one would still be needed even if you removed the "following runner" text from ruling two. With a hard slide, you could easily end up with a runner touching neither the base nor the position it was located in. The runner needs to remain safe in that case.

[LDUB]

Originally posted by akalsey
Actually, rulling one would still be needed even if you removed the "following runner" text from ruling two. With a hard slide, you could easily end up with a runner touching neither the base nor the position it was located in. The runner needs to remain safe in that case.

Ok, you do need rule 1 then. Players use the base as a way to stop their momentum, and when the base moves, then they will continue to move also.

[DG]

Originally posted by LDUB

The following runner is not the subject of this post. [/B]

Telling others that thier response about changing the wording of a rule is not the subject of this post. [/B][/QUOTE]

You need to go over to the "get it right" post to take a leak.