Force Play?

[greymule]

I have seen a BR retreat from 1B a few times. In one instance, a BR had reached 1B but wrongly thought that F9 had caught his short pop. So he started back down the 1B line on his way to the dugout on the 3B side. His teammates yelled for him to get back to the bag, but F4 threw the ball to 1B before he got there. The ump called him out on the basis of his having reinstated the "force." That seemed logical to me (especially since I was playing on the defense). The guy did argue, though, of course.

On another occasion, the BU was not definite about whether a ball had been trapped in left-center, and when F7 threw to 2B for a force on the runner from 1B, the BR thought the out call applied to him and so started back toward his bench. If memory serves, he got back to 1B safely.

It's true that the BR has no good reason to go back toward home; these plays arose from misunderstandings.

[Dave Reed]

It is commonly believed that under OBR a B/R is not "forced" at first, and one can plausibly infer this because rule 4.09 (a) and (b) make a clear distinction between force outs and the out made by B/R at 1st base. In this thread, Atl Blue quotes JEA referring to the B/R being "forced out." As it happens, OBR also makes such a reference. See Definitions, Double Play (b):
"A reverse force double play is one in which the first out is a force play and the second out is made on a runner for whom the force is removed by reason of the first out. Examples of reverse force plays: runner on first, one out; batter grounds to first baseman, who steps on first base (one out) and throws to second baseman or shortstop for the second out (a tag play). Another example..."[snip]

So this OBR example of a reverse force double play-- which requires the first out to be a "force play"-- has the first out being made by B/R before he reaches 1st base. If Jim Evans was being "sloppy", so were the writers of the OBR.

Rich Fronheiser suggests that the Definition of Force Play, in conjunction with 4.09, shows that B/R is not forced at first. My own opinion is that the definition can be read to include the B/R at first base provided that we believe the batter can "occupy" home base. The term "occupy" isn't defined in OBR, and I choose to believe that the batter does occupy home base while he is at bat. And so it is "technically correct" to refer to a force play on B/R at first. (You've got to admit it would make discussions with coaches, players, and spectators easier if it didn't seem necessary to say " well, technically it isn't a force at first, but...")

Dave

[LDUB]

Originally posted by Dave Reed
It is commonly believed that under OBR a B/R is not "forced" at first, and one can plausibly infer this because rule 4.09 (a) and (b) make a clear distinction between force outs and the out made by B/R at 1st base. In this thread, Atl Blue quotes JEA referring to the B/R being "forced out." As it happens, OBR also makes such a reference. See Definitions, Double Play (b):
"A reverse force double play is one in which the first out is a force play and the second out is made on a runner for whom the force is removed by reason of the first out. Examples of reverse force plays: runner on first, one out; batter grounds to first baseman, who steps on first base (one out) and throws to second baseman or shortstop for the second out (a tag play). Another example..."[snip]

So this OBR example of a reverse force double play-- which requires the first out to be a "force play"-- has the first out being made by B/R before he reaches 1st base. If Jim Evans was being "sloppy", so were the writers of the OBR.

Yes the rule book does talk about reverse force plays, but as you say, they are being sloppy. Everyone knows what they mean so there is no reason to waste space and write "if the BR is put out before reaching 1st base."

Originally posted by Dave Reed
My own opinion is that the definition can be read to include the B/R at first base provided that we believe the batter can "occupy" home base. The term "occupy" isn't defined in OBR, and I choose to believe that the batter does occupy home base while he is at bat. And so it is "technically correct" to refer to a force play on B/R at first.

Read rule 7.08 (e) ...However, if the forced runner, after touching the next base, retreats for any reason towards the base he had last occupied, the force play is reinstated, and he can again be put out if the defense tags the base to which he is forced;

Now let's say the play at first is a force. Now if the BR retreats back past first, the force would be reinstated. Do you want to change the play at first to a force and therefore making the previous statement true?

Originally posted by Dave Reed
(You've got to admit it would make discussions with coaches, players, and spectators easier if it didn't seem necessary to say " well, technically it isn't a force at first, but...")

I'm just being curious here, but how often do you discuss the play on the BR at first base not being a force with coaches, players, and spectators?

[Atl Blue]

Umpires "know" a batter is not forced at first.

Great. Now, when talking with players, coaches or anyone else regarding this "fact", forget it. For all PRACTICAL purposes, a batter is forced at first. As I said, walk into any major level clinic and start this "but it's not a force" stuff and they will laugh you out of the room as a "book umpire".

If it looks like a duck, and it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, best way to treat the thing is as a duck.

[greymule]

Read rule 7.08 (e) ...However, if the forced runner, after touching the next base, retreats for any reason towards the base he had last occupied, the force play is reinstated, and he can again be put out if the defense tags the base to which he is forced;

Now let's say the play at first is a force. Now if the BR retreats back past first, the force would be reinstated. Do you want to change the play at first to a force and therefore making the previous statement true?

Are we certain that the "force" is not reinstated if the BR retreats toward home after touching 1B? It seems that opinion on this is divided. Of course, opinion means nothing if there has been a definitive ruling. Has there been?

If the "force" is not reinstated, perhaps this is the one instance in which the out at 1B not being technically a force makes a difference. Or does anyone know of any others? I can't think of any.

[Kaliix]

I tend to agree with Rich in that it would be a case of abandonment as stated in Rule 7.08

(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.

The only problem with the abandonment idea, if you want to get really picky, is that the rule states that the runner must leave the baseline. But if the runner believes that there is no further play, abandonment sounds like the way to go.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser

I would think that, since he's touched first base, it would likely fall more under whether there was abandonment or not -- once touching first, a BR has no reason whatsoever to head back towards the plate.

[greymule]

If we're going to apply abandonment to any runner who retreats back down the 1B line, then we're going to have to call an out on this play:

BR bunts and reaches 1B safely, but somebody says, "Foul ball, right ump?" BR then leaves 1B and takes a few steps down the 1B line. The coach then says, "Get back. It was fair." So BR returns to 1B before the defense can play on him.

Would anyone call the runner out for abandonment on that play? I wouldn't, even though he did momentarily abandon the base. In fact, I've seen a variation of that play a hundred times. Never saw abandonment called.

But, with BR down the line toward home, if the defense did play on him, could they simply throw to 1B before he got back, or would they have to tag him?

Absent a ruling, I'll go with the "reinstated force" theory. The BR has to get to first, whether we interpret his presence in the batter's box as "occupying" home or not.

[LDUB]

Originally posted by greymule
Absent a ruling, I'll go with the "reinstated force" theory. The BR has to get to first, whether we interpret his presence in the batter's box as "occupying" home or not.

6.05
A batter is out when (j) After a third strike or after he hits a fair ball, he or first base is tagged before he touches first base.

You are straight up making up rules. First off there is no force, so how can the force be reinstated? Read 6.05, has the BR touched first base? If he has, then the base can no longer be tagged to retire him. The rule makes no reference to if the BR retreats back past first base.

[Rich]

Originally posted by LDUB

6.05
A batter is out when (j) After a third strike or after he hits a fair ball, he or first base is tagged before he touches first base.

You are straight up making up rules. First off there is no force, so how can the force be reinstated? Read 6.05, has the BR touched first base? If he has, then the base can no longer be tagged to retire him. The rule makes no reference to if the BR retreats back past first base.

While I'm on your side of the argument, I can't be for this reason. This is no different than a player touching second and heading back to first base for whatever reason, which reinstates a force.

[Kaliix]

I agree, a force play is defined as "A FORCE PLAY is a play in which a runner legally loses his right to occupy a base by reason of the batter becoming a runner."

The batter becoming a runner creates a force on any other base runner but not on himself.

Also 7.08 (e) states "The force is removed as soon as the runner touches the base to which he is forced to advance, and if he overslides or overruns the base, the runner must be tagged to be put out. However, if the forced runner, after touching the next base, retreats for any reason towards the base he had last occupied, the force play is reinstated, and he can again be put out if the defense tags the base to which he is forced"

7.08 (e)talks about a forced runner retreating towards a base he last occupied and since the batter did not occupy a base, and wasn't forced to advance, the force can't be reinstated.

I am not advocating calling abandonment the moment he starts back to the dugout. The "obviously abandoning his effort to run the bases" gives an umpire latitude in making what is obviously a judgement call, and I would be lenient in applying that rule.

I don't think however that stating that the force is reinstated if he goes back towards the plate is erroneous.

Originally posted by LDUB

6.05
A batter is out when (j) After a third strike or after he hits a fair ball, he or first base is tagged before he touches first base.

You are straight up making up rules. First off there is no force, so how can the force be reinstated? Read 6.05, has the BR touched first base? If he has, then the base can no longer be tagged to retire him. The rule makes no reference to if the BR retreats back past first base.

[LDUB]

Originally posted by LDUB

6.05
A batter is out when (j) After a third strike or after he hits a fair ball, he or first base is tagged before he touches first base.

You are straight up making up rules. First off there is no force, so how can the force be reinstated? Read 6.05, has the BR touched first base? If he has, then the base can no longer be tagged to retire him. The rule makes no reference to if the BR retreats back past first base.

What do I do if this comes up? I am PU and B1 singles. He touches first, but thought the ball was foul so he reterats past first. The defense throws to F3 who catches the ball and steps on the base. My partner the BU calls the BR out. The BR then walks to the dugout.

Then the offensive manager comes to me and says that it's not a force and so on. I would put the BR on first base. That is the correct thing to do, correct?

What if the manager never comes to me? I would go to the BU and tell him what happned and put the BR on first in that case also. I think I did the right thing in both cases, what do you think?

And what about calling the BR out for abandonment. I would say no since he thought he was out because of the BU's call.

[LDUB]

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser

While I'm on your side of the argument, I can't be for this reason. This is no different than a player touching second and heading back to first base for whatever reason, which reinstates a force.

Have you changed you mind on this issue? You agreed with me before.

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser
I would think that, since he's touched first base, it would likely fall more under whether there was abandonment or not -- once touching first, a BR has no reason whatsoever to head back towards the plate.

[Gee]

One reason it is not called a force at first is the fact that when a runner passes any base including home he has removed the force (Where applicable). So take the classic play with an R3 and an R1, two outs.

Batter singles, R3 scores, R1 fails to touch second in passing, stops immediately and tries to scramble back but is tagged out before he gets back.

Ruling: Score the run, R1 removed the FORCE and was put out for an off base out.

Take a similar situation at first with an R3 and an R1 with two outs. Batter singles, R3 scores, B/R fails to touch first in running THROUGH the base, he stops immediately after passing and is tagged out before he returns. B/R was tagged out before touching first for the third out.

Ruling: Don't score the run. Couldn't remove the force as there is no force there. If the B/R made the turn at first and was tagged out, the run would score. There is a reason for everything. G.

[LDUB]

Originally posted by Gee
Batter singles, R3 scores, R1 fails to touch second in passing, stops immediately and tries to scramble back but is tagged out before he gets back. Ruling: Score the run, R1 removed the FORCE and was put out for an off base out.

If the defense is smart, they will appeal and get a fourth out, thus disallowing the run.

[Gee]

If the defense is smart, they will appeal and get a fourth out, thus disallowing the run.
------------------------------------------
Sorry, can't do that.

Since R1 didn't leave the immediate area of the base he failed to touch in passing, he must be tagged for the out, no appeal allowed, ever. see OBR 7.10(d) extended to all bases. G.

[Edited by Gee on Jul 23rd, 2004 at 09:40 AM]