I originally posted this over 5 yrs ago on another forum. I was wondering what is the current thinking/interpretation.

Play (OBR):

R1 and R3. 1 out. Batter singles. R3 scores. R1 goes to third but misses second base. The batter is thrown out attempting to go to second. An appeal is made at second and R1, who is now on third, is called out.
Does the run count?

Paul

My opinion:

When the batter was out, the force was removed. It is now just a timing play so the run scores.

The real question should be: Was the force removed BEFORE R1 missed second base. G.

Force Play
 

I agree it is a timing play when the force was removed. Either way unless it was a forced double play R3 would score.

I remember from years back that there was a camp that held to the interpretation that since there was a force at the time of the missed base, it could not be removed subsequently by the out on BR. I believe there was some official ruling on this. Does anybody have anything official?

Paul

"SNIP"
"I remember from years back that there was a camp that held to the interpretation that since there was a force at the time of the missed base, it could not be removed subsequently by the out on BR. I believe there was some official ruling on this. Does anybody have anything official?"
------------------------------------------
That is what I was alluding to in my previous post. In the play we are discussing it is pretty obvious that R1 had passed second base and probably on third when the batter runner was retired at second.

That be the case, the B/R was tagged out for an off base out therefore it did not lift the force play that was in effect when R1 missed second and a proper appeal would reestablish the force and nullify the run.

The only way the force play could be lifted on R1 would be if the B/R was "FORCED" out at first, which of course he wasn't. Have to watch those runners. G.

doesnt a new play cancel out the appeal opp.???

"SNIP"

"Doesnt a new play cancel out the appeal opp.???"
----------------------------------------------

No because it was continuous action. G.

I don't mean to go off on a tangent but I think a scenario could be conjured up where R1 and the B/R are between first and second at the same time and the B/R is tagged out for an "off base out." I think here the force play on R1 would be lifted.

Paul

Yes, the force would be lifted, but it's not relevant here because R1 hadn't missed the base (yet).

A simmilar situation comes up all the time. R1 and ground ball to F3, who steps on first, BR is out, and R1 is no longer forced to advance. F3 throws to F6 who tags R1 out at second.

From J/R:

<B>If a consecutive runner has been forced to advance by reason of the batter becoming a runner, and he is forced at the moment he misses his advance base, an appeal of that base is ALWAYS a force out. EG: bases loaded, one out. The batter triples. R1 missed second and the batter-runner missed first. First the defense successfully appeals against the batter-runner, then R1. The appeal of the batter-runner does not negate the fact that R1 was forced when he missed the base. R1's appeal out (third out) is also a force out; R2 and R3's runs are negated.</b>

According to J/R, if it was a force when it was missed, it's a force when it is appealed.

This makes more sense to me than the "off base" vs. "force" on the batter runner lingo.

It does to me too.

I can see the difference. As in the reverse double play, the B/R is "forced out" which removes the force on R1 at second because the out was recorded at first BEFORE R1 arrived at second.

In the play we are talking about, even if the B/R was forced out at first it wouldn't matter providing the MISS took place BEFORE the out was made. Got it.

[Edited by Gee on Jul 19th, 2004 at 02:10 PM]

"R1 and R3. 1 out. Batter singles. R3 scores. R1 goes to third but misses second base. The batter is thrown out attempting to go to second. An appeal is made at second and R1, who is now on third, is called out.
Does the run count?"



So if I am following along correctly here, the third out is the appeal at second which is still a force, and the run does not score.

If you ascribe to the theory taught in J/R, then yes, you are correct.

First Base
 

The only missed base that a force cannot be removed is First Base.

Example: Bases loaded, 2 outs. The batter rips one off the fence. All three runners score and then the BR is thrown out at third for the third out.
But wait, the defensive coach saw that the BR had missed first base. So he wants to make an appeal. The ball is dead. So the PU informs the Offensive team to put a batter in the box. The pitcher toes the rubber, backs off and throws to first base. The FU declares that the BR did indeed miss First Base.

Results: Fourth out, the BR being called out twice in the same at bats, and since it would have been the third out by force, NO RUNS!

Whew! Try explaining that to a coach!!

Re: First Base
 

Especially since a play at first is technically not a force out. Sure, it's OK to think of it that way, but there is a specific rule that deals with the third out at first base.

Rich
Is the batter runner not forced to run to first by rule?

No the play at first is not a force.

2.00
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.

[Edited by LDUB on Jul 20th, 2004 at 02:33 AM]

OK.
I found these.

6.08
The batter becomes a runner and is entitled to first base without liability to be put out (provided he advances to and touches first base) when_ (a) Four "balls" have been called by the umpire; A batter who is entitled to first base because of a base on balls must go to first base and touch the base before other base runners are forced to advance.


7.10

PLAY. (a) Batter hits ball out of park or ground rule double and misses first base (ball is dead)_he may return to first base to correct his mistake before he touches second but if he touches second he may not return to first and if defensive team appeals he is declared out at first. PLAY. (b) Batter hits ball to shortstop who throws wild into stand (ball is dead)_batter runner misses first base but is awarded second base on the overthrow. Even though the umpire has awarded the runner second base on the overthrow, the runner must touch first base before he proceeds to second base.



7.12
Unless two are out, the status of a following runner is not affected by a preceding runner's failure to touch or retouch a base. If, upon appeal, the preceding runner is the third out, no runners following him shall score. If such third out is the result of a force play, neither preceding nor following runners shall score



[Edited by teacherspit on Jul 20th, 2004 at 03:18 AM]

No, the batter-runner forces other runners. I'm not certain why the writers of the rule book wrote it this way, but they did. See 2.00 FORCE and 4.09.

It doesn't hurt to think of it as a force play, as it is handled the exact same as one. But I don't think it hurts to be as precise and familiar with the rules as possible.

--Rich

Rich is correct, TECHNICALLY the batter is not forced at 1B, by rule.

I have also been told at higher level clinics that if you try to split this fine hair you will be laughed out of the clinic. Umps <B>treat</b> the batter at first as forced, even if that is not TECHNICALLY what the rule says.

But I do disagree with teacherspit's assertion that the only base to which the force of a missed base cannot be removed is 1B. If you submit this question to WUA, Rick will tell you that if the base was a forced base when missed, then it is still treated as a forced base when appealed.

There is definitely a lesson here. Trying to show how smart you are at a higher level clinic is a bad move. If you are there to learn, keep your mouth shut and learn. If you are there as a clinician, pick whatever nits you want.

I don't disagree with that at all. And i still think you should be as precise as possible when writing about the rules.

--Rich

The BRD notes that in OBR (and Fed), if the runner was forced at the time he missed the base, an appeal would be a force. In NCAA, the appeal would be considered a force if the force was on <i>at the time the play began.</i> (That difference allows the construction of at least one very strange game-ending play.)

Umpires who also do ASA softball have to remember yet another difference: whenever the batter is put out, no subsequent out can be a force out, and whenever a following runner is put out, no out on a preceding runner can be a force out. In ASA, the original play on this thread would <i>not</i> be a force out.

Rich:

From Jim Evans Rules of Baseball Annotated, otherwise known as JEA:

<I>Bases loaded.. .two outs. The batter smashes a hot liner past the third baseman. The ball hits the third base umpire in the foot and deflects to the shortstop. The runner from third crosses the plate...but...the batter-runner is thrown out at first. Does the run count?
RULING: The ball is alive and in play. Since the third out is a <B>force out</b>...no run scores.</I>

I agree, TECHNICALLY, he’s wrong, it’s not a “force out”. He is right in that the run does not count as the 3rd out came before the BR touched 1B.

Just posted to show that even the “big dogs” get a little sloppy in calling this a force out at 1B.

Apparently the out at 1B is a force out in everything but name. I seem to remember a thread a couple of years ago in which nobody could come up with anything that would change if the rulesmakers announced that from now on the out at 1B would be considered a force out. (freix was a main contributor—where has he been lately?)

That's why I still maintain that a batter-runner who touches 1B and then retreats in the direction of home plate has reinstated the "force" and can be put out by tagging 1B, just as he could be put out for retreating from 2B or 3B after arriving safely. Opinion was divided on this, but I don't think anyone found anything definitive.

Force @ 1B?
 

Greymule,
Yes, technically BR is not forced to 1B by a following runner, but BR never has a base he can return to, so he is "forced" to 1B.

In the case where BR obtains 1B but retreats back to home, the force is back on, just as it would be at 2B or 3B if a runner retreats back from the base that he was forced to. In all three cases, the runners have no where else to go except to the next base.

Re: Force @ 1B?
 

Is this correct? I had this come up in a game last month and I posted the a question about it. All the responses came back that the defense can not just tag first base to get the out, BR has to be tagged out.

Re: Re: Force @ 1B?
 

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.

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.

OBR refers to force play on B/R at 1st base
 

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

Re: OBR refers to force play on B/R at 1st base
 

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."

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?

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?

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.

<b>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?</b>

Are we certain that the "force" is <i>not</i> 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.

Re: Re: Re: Force @ 1B?
 

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

Quote:

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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]

I'm surprised that after all these years, no definitive ruling has come down concerning the BR retreating toward home after touching 1B.

I admit I am not certain of the answer. It seems to me a good case can be made either way about whether the BR—let's put it this way—"reinstated his obligation to get to 1B before he or the base is tagged."

The rules apparently do not say that getting a BR out by tagging 1b with ball in hand is a force, but the rules do say that we can tag the base with ball in hand to get the BR out. Now if we did the same thing at 2b on a batted ball with R1 it would be considered a force. The end result is the same. Therefore, I choose to consider getting BR out by tagging 1b with ball in hand a force. 9.01(c) allows me to do so. Now once I have made that decision, then 7.08(c) allows me to reinstate the force if BR retreats past 1b and goes back home for whatever reason, just like I would if R1 retreated toward 2b if forced to 2b by BR. FED and OBR agree on reinstating the force in this manner. "That's my ruling coach!"

R3, 2 out; tie score, bottom of the final inning.
BR hits to the gap; R3 scores & BR reaches 1st safely.
Game over, Home team wins, right? BUT WAIT!!
BR "retreats" from 1st to join the celebration around the plate, defense throws to 1st baseman who holds the ball securely in hand or glove while in contact with the base. (Or tags BR, actually, either works)

If the play @ 1st is a force and "retreating" toward home "reinstates the force", then the run doesn't score - 3 outs, bring on the next half-inning, score's still tied. This could go on for a while.

The play at 1st is NOT a "force", although, yes indeedie, BR has an "obligation" to advance. If BR reaches and touches 1st before being put out, but (being a typical bonehead) retreats toward home for some reason HE (not the base) must be tagged to make the out; and if the tag should happen to be the 3rd out, any run which reached the plate before the time of the tag WILL SCORE.

There is, in fact, a reason for everything.

[Edited by cbfoulds on Jul 23rd, 2004 at 01:06 AM]

And DG:
9:01(c) does NOT allow you to make the ruling as you have outlined, as this is not a "point not covered". As pointed out, with citations, by other posters, the rules provide a definition of "force play" and the correct way to rule on the play at 1st. The fact that not every possible permutation is listed explicitly in the rule book does not make the matter one for 9:01(c).

Given your made up situation, my ruling stands. The bonehead retreated, reinstating the FORCE, and if defense plays on him the run does not score. Why am I supposed to protect the team with boneheads? Do you think I would call that in this situation? When then run crosses home and the batter makes it 1b, I don't see anything else happen, hypothetical or otherwise.

Not "made up" DG, it happened TONIGHT [well, actually, I simplified a little] in a Legion game I was doing. The only thing "made up" is YOUR "rule(ing)". If you can get away with making 'em up as you go, good on ya. I prefer to win my protests.

"Each umpire has authority to rule on any point not specifically covered in these rules". The fact that every situation is not covered is exactly what 9.01(c) is for. A BR retreating toward home after touching 1b IS a point not covered. The fact that a BR is not officially considered "forced" by definition of force is not covered, but IMO a BR is forced at 1b. There may be 457 "errors" in the MLB rules, as some here have claimed, and if so this has got to be one of them.

"Coach, the runner from 3B touched home at least a second before the batter touched first. The batter was not forced and he can not retreat past 1b after the game is over. That's my judgement, appeal if you like." Do you really believe I would reverse a game winning hit because of a situation not covered in the rules?

I doubt the batter would be retreating toward home except to celebrate a game winning hit so this whole question is rather mute.

Yep I know, it is a great rule, but in this case, THE DEFINITION OF A FORCE OUT IS SPECIFICALLY COVERED IN THESE RULES.

So does this mean I can call a balk for F1 taking signs while off the ruber. As long as we are making up rules, you might as well call it a two base award. A penalty for this infraction is not specifically covered, so does that mean I can make up anything I want it to be? Hey that's what 9.01(c) is for.

The ruling I made had some precedent (legal term lawyers like to use), in that a runner retreating from any other base would reinstate the force. Make up anything you like, but that is not what 9.01(c) is for.

A BR hits the ball in RF with runner on 3B. He advances to 1b while runner scores, and for some unknown reason retreats to home picks up his bat and gets in the batter's box. (If we are going to debate situations that will never happen we may as well go all the way with this).
So what is your call if defense throws the ball to 1B? You can't call him safe, and direct him to go to 1b, while he is standing in the batter's box, or can you?. I can't use 9.01(c) for this?

Let me see if I get this:
BR going to 1st does not fit the definition of a "Force Play" printed in the rule book; BUT "in your opinion" BR is forced at 1b; SO (wait for it) that makes it a point not covered and therefore under 9:01(c) your opinion trumps the rule book?

As for if you would reverse a run, who knows? If you are making up rules, it is hard to predict what you might do. As for being moot, this thread contains a couple of reasons why BR might retreat - misunderstanding of fair/foul is one; game winning hit is not the only one, and it ain't a game winner if the run doesn't score.

THE POINT IS - no force at 1st base; if BR touches base safely and then for some (ANY) reason "retreats", HE, and not the bag, must be tagged to make the out. If BR is the 3rd out of the half-inning, being tagged after first reaching but then "retreating", any run(s) reaching the plate before the out COUNT. And this point IS specifically covered by the rules, you just have to read, understand, and use ALL of the rules applicable to the situation.

Just because there is not a SINGLE specific INDIVIDUAL rule for a given situation, does NOT mean the situation is not "specifically covered" in the printed rule book.

9:01(c) is a great rule [actually, 9:01(b) is my personal favorite], but it gets used WAY too often by folk what don't know the other rules, to justify deciding a case any damn way they like.

And BTW, am I the only one who noticed that your "run counts, appeal if you like ..." recital started with telling your hypothetical coach that THERE WAS NO FORCE @ 1B? Does this mean that, while you are making up rules, those rulings are different, depending upon the circumstance: force at 1B MOST of the time, but not if it would negate a game winning run? How, exactly, do you figure THAT is good judgment (or use of 9:01(c))?

Nope, sorry, you can't. The point IS "covered".

I am a lawyer, and your "precedent" has no precedential value, being contradicted by the written "statute".

So, again, the call is:
No force (BR has touched 1stB)
Defense must tag BR, not base, to get the out.
DO NOT "call him safe"; DO NOT "direct him to ... 1B"; DO NOT call him out until he is tagged (off 1st base, preferably); and BTW, DO score R3, even if BR getting tagged makes 3 outs.

[Edited by cbfoulds on Jul 23rd, 2004 at 02:50 AM]

I don't think it matters whether you consider the play at first a force or not-- in this game winning situation the run scores when R3 has touched home and B/R has reached first base safely. All the requirements of 4.09 are fufilled: there's no missed bases, B/R was not put out before touching first base, and there is no force out-- yet-- and there isn't going to be a force out because the game is over immediately, according to 4.11 (c).

Consider if your situation had R1,R3 instead of just R3. Now R3 touches home, R1 reaches 2nd base safely, B/R reaches first, and then R1 goes toward first to congratulate B/R for his game winning hit. Defense throws to 2nd. Is he out and the run nullified because of a reinstated force play? I say no; the game is already over.

The plot thickens if there is no potential to end the game. Assume R3, R1, and B/R singles. R3 touches home, R1 touches and stands on 2nd base, and mistakenly believes that time has been called. He realizes that he is still wearing some batting armor, and moves toward his 1st base coach while removing it. Is the force reinstated? If put out, is the run nullified? Can he be put out by tagging 2nd base? I argue (with only moderate conviction) two points: 1. He isn't "retreating", he is just confused, and so the force is not reinstated. 2. If the umpire judges that he is retreating, this is effectively a new play following the play that led to R3 reaching home, so the run scores.

Dave

Hey guys,
 

DG has never let the rules, or their correct interpretation, get in his way when posting on this board.

I have learned to just ignore him.

Tee

When was the last time you saw it become an issue in MLB (or even MiLB)?

Approximately never would be my guess.

That's why there's been no "definitive ruling".

There's no valid reason for a BR to return to home *during a play*. There is a valid reason for R1 to return to first during a play.

IF R1 returns in the mistaken belief that he is "supposed to" (that is, a mistaken belief that the return is proper baserunning), then the rules provide for that -- the force is reinstated.

BR cannot claim that the return is in some mistaken belief that the return is proper baserunning. So, the "force" is not reinstated.

Get an out for abandonment, or making a travesty of the game, or running out of the baseline (my take: until BR touches first, there's a reason to return home --to avoid the tag. So, the "baseline" includes back to home. After BR touches first, there's no reason to return, so the "baseline" doesn't extend back towards home). But, don't get an out for a "force play."

Gee,
The scoring or not scoring the run is same whether we consider B/R to be forced at first or not. In your second scenario, even if a putative force on B/R is removed when he passes first base, the run isn't scored unless he touches the base safely. Rule 4.09 (a) (1) says so.
There may indeed be a reason to conclude that B/R isn't forced at first, but this isn't it.

By the way, can you point me to an elucidation of the principle that passing a base removes the force? I'd like to understand what happens in your first scenario if R1 continues to third and is called out on appeal.

Dave

You wrote,

The scoring or not scoring the run is same whether we consider B/R to be forced at first or not.
------------------------------
First let me answer your question about removing the force.

As we all know, the force is removed when a runner touches the base he was forced to. When a runner fails to touch his forced base in passing he is assumed to have touched that base, which of course removes the force, pending appeal. OBR 6.08(c),7.04(d) and 8.05 AR.

So in the play at second, once the runner passed the base he failed to touch, he is assumed to have touched it and removed the force, therefore the run scores.

At first when the runner failed to touch first, when running through (still passing), he didn't remove the TOUCH and when tagged out the run doesn't score because the runner didn't TOUCH first before he was tagged out. OBR 4.09(a). There is a difference.

You further asked:

"I'd like to understand what happens in your first scenario if R1 continues to third and is called out on appeal".
--------------
Once the runner leaves the immediate area of the base (I use the cutout) he can be appealed. OBR 7.10(d) extended to all bases.

If he is succesfully appealed the force out would be restored and the run wouldn't score. That is why I clearly stated that the runner stopped immediately and scrambled back and couldn't be appealed and must be tagged for an off base out, since he never left the immediate area of the base, again OBR 7.10(d)

Prior to the middle seventies they used OBR 7.10(b) which entails touching the bases out of order. Under that rule the runner that failed to touch second in passing was not appealable until he touched his advance base.

They extended 7.10(d) to all bases because 7.10(b) and (d) were out of sinc and now they are closer and there is no reason to use (b) at this time although it is still there and can be used if applicable. Hope you understand all that. G.

__________________________________________________ ____






[Edited by Gee on Jul 23rd, 2004 at 01:32 PM]

There's no practical difference. BR is assumed to touch first when he passes it. The tag results in an out if it's an appeal -- it's the same as the "reinstating the force" example you provide when R1 misses 2nd and is appealed for the out.

"SNIP"

There's no practical difference. BR is assumed to touch first when he passes it. The tag results in an out if it's an appeal -- it's the same as the "reinstating the force" example you provide when R1 misses 2nd and is appealed for the out.
------------------------

I just don't see it that way Bob.

I purposely said that in both situations the B/R and runner stopped immediately after failing to touch the base and scrambled back.

With that said, when the runner at first failed to touch the base in passing and was tagged out before his immediate return, it's an appeal play and since there is no force play at first he is out for not TOUCHING the base before he is put out. Since a run cannot score when the B/R is put out before TOUCHING first base, don't score the run.

At second when the runner failed to touch the base in passing and was tagged out on his immediate return he has lifted the force and must be tagged with no appeal allowed, ever, therefore score the run.

Two plays almost exactly the sames but according to the rules one scores and one doesn't. Isn't that difference due to no force play at first. I think it is. Regards G.

[Edited by Gee on Jul 23rd, 2004 at 04:19 PM]

Gentlemen I know in ASA that the second a BR stops and steps backwards he is called out. I like that rule. I know that baseball does not have that rule. But as Bob said it is an umpires judgement and there are ways to call a BR out backtracking to home.

<I>and there are ways to call a BR out backtracking to home.</i>

As long as he stays in the baseline, what are they?

Making a travesty of the game for one.

REVERSE BASE RUNNING RULE MYTH
In order to correct a base running mistake, the runner MUST retrace his steps and retouch the bases in reverse order. The only time a runner is out for running in reverse, is when he is making a travesty of the game or tries to confuse the defense.

Rules: 7.08(I), 7.10(b)


Your judgement!

[Edited by teacherspit on Jul 24th, 2004 at 12:50 PM]

Would you call this situation making a travesty of the game?

R1, no outs. Batter bunts down the first base line a little to hard, F3 comes in, fields the ball and starts running toward B/R for a tag out and a possible reverse double play at second. B/R backpeddles to give R1 time to reach second.

With your rule F3 sees B/R step back, knowing he is going to be called out he and fires to second for the double play. Might work in softball but not in Baseball.

If the B/R backtracks to the plate he is called out but until then he is fine. G.

[Edited by Gee on Jul 24th, 2004 at 12:54 PM]

Gee,
In my oppinion the BR has abandoned his run to First. And the fielder need not wait until he tags to make the throw to second. And futher more, that the first baseman choose to go after the BR knowing that he has to run to first is even more reason to call the BR out.
I can't see, and this is feasible, the first baseman running the BR back to home. At some point you have to stop it. It is not smart baserunning. I will call it a travesty whether you agree or not.

Not everyone interpets the Rules the same. The application of the rules for the most part is left up to the discretion of the umpire. We are not machines. Nor should we act like ones.

And your point about Softball and Baseball, so what, they are both games that require baserunning. I was just pointing out how ASA has simplfied that situation. And I like it. It makes it a lot easier on the fielders and umps.

The only way you could call a runner out for abandonment when he has never left his baseline is to have the calling umpire make a travesty of the rules. G.

<I>In my oppinion the BR has abandoned his run to First.</i>

So any runner that gets caught in a rundown has abandoned his effort to advance? And oh yeah, the abandonment rule says "leaves the baseline". Last time I checked the baseline went from home to first, AND from first to home.

<I>And the fielder need not wait until he tags to make the throw to second.</i>

Correct, but if he doesn't tag the BR or the base, he is risking getting at least one out. The BR backing up like this is SMART baserunning.

<I>And futher more, that the first baseman choose to go after the BR knowing that he has to run to first is even more reason to call the BR out.</i>

No, it's even more reason not to reward the stupidity of the F3. There is no reason for him to chase BR, but if he does, I'm not rewarding stupidity.

<I>I can't see, and this is feasible, the first baseman running the BR back to home. At some point you have to stop it.</i>

Exactly, when the BR reveses course all the way to HP, it will be stopped.

<I>It is not smart baserunning.</i>

It may be VERY smart baserunning. If the BR can interest F3 in chasing him long enough, other base runners are going to advance. That is often called a sacrifice, depending on if he was giving himself up on purpose.

Do you think ANY base runner that gets into a pickle should be out for "making a travesty of the game"? What if the runner is forced. Example, 1, out R1 and R3, ground ball to F4. F4 reaches out to tag the passing R1, but R1 backs up, all the way to 1B if he wants to, in order to keep F4 from tagging him, and thus "breaking up" the DP, so now the run scores. Why is F4 backing up in this case any different than the BR backing up to avoid a tag? F4 was forced, he was dead meat, all he was doing was prolonging the play and making F4 work harder for the out. Perfectly legal, AND smart baserunning.

<I>I will call it a travesty whether you agree or not.</i>

Don't count on any upper level games with this kind of absurd call. Any good coach or ump will laugh you out of the park. Next upper level clinic you attend, bring up that you would call this a travesty and call the BR out. You'll just LOVE the reaction from the instructors and other umps on that one!

What is your diffinition of upper level?

And who cares about upper level? I sure don't.
You nick pickers are something else.
I bet y'all say one thing and then when you get on the field you do something else.
I don't appreciate personally being attacked on my views. EX: telling me someone is going to laugh me out of a room. If I am wrong so be it. Because I disagree with you doesn't mean you have to attack me.

Oh by the way, "In my judgement he abandoned the base" What are you going to do? Protest?
And if I want to call it a "Making a Travesty of the Game", Who is to say it isn't? It an umpire's judgement.
This is the most subjective objective team sport ever.

I have no quorums as to how I call a game. I am confident in my application of the rules.
If I tell both coaches that their pitcher has to step off the rubber before throwing to a base to make an appeal. That pitcher better step off the rubber. Whether you agree or not. Both teams know it so I don't see the problem.

What I have read in this forum so far for the most part pretty good information.
But what I have also seen is that there are a small few whom have taken it upon themselves to have a closed mine on other umpires interpentations of the Rules. And ridicule any whom oppose.
Heck, most everyone that reads the Bible has a different interpretation. So why not a simple Base Ball Rule Book?

Actually, yes, I will protest. Because it is a RULES question, not a judgment call. Simply putting "In my judgment .. " in front of what ever travesty of "umpiring" you are about to give voice to does not make it a judgment call. If your Board/UIC/Protest Committee has the brains and/or the balls which the creator supplied to little white mice, my protest will be upheld, too.

Here's the problem: you are confidently MAKING UP RULES to suit yourself. This reflects badly on all umpires, and I bet you could find several quorums of upper level umpires on this board and elsewhere to tell you you should cut it out. The next guy to come along after you has to deal with the s#!%house YOU created when he simply follows the CORRECT rule(s) which you ignored and doesn't use your dumba$$ invented "rule", which you have convinced the poor kids and their clueless Coach is "The Rule". It is hard enough to keep the various codes straight ourselves, and to calm down summer league coaches who expect us to call the HS rule (because that is the best level of amateur ball [& umpiring] they are used to seeing), without adding the grief caused by ad-hoc "umpires" like yourself and the 9.01(c) addicts.

Your problem is not the stuff you don't know [which is a whole lot], but all the stuff you "know" that is just dead WRONG.

You gotta be kidding.

I'm laughing already. ..
 

I had to laugh. A simple Rule Book - NOT. Because this is not a simple game. Surely umpires can make it hard, but there is a lot to the game of baseball.

But, using common sense will get you a long way in umpiring. Calling a runner out when there is no rule for it is NOT using common sense. Think about it.

And for an umpire to make up a rule saying he abandoned or made a travesty, that's even worse than missing the call.

This forum can be a great help, but you have to be willing to get the book out and search. Don't discount the many many hours that many of us put into the rules weekly to be better umpires.

thanks
David

"Abandonment" happens only *after* the runner reaches first.

NAPBL is clear that the BR isn't out until he reaches back to home. (4.24-1)

The rules you quoted cannot be used to call a BR out for retreating towards home if he has not yet touched first

7.08(i)uses confusing the defense and travesty of the game as reasons for calling the runner out.

As stated there is perfectly good reason to retreat, to give the another runner time to get to second or third.

Travesty means mocking or ridiculing the game. Avoiding a tag is not mocking the game. Thinking you may have to bat again is not ridiculing the game.

7.10(b) is an appeal play. You call that during continuous action of a live ball and you very well might be making a travesty of the game.

The force can only be reinstated "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..." (Rule 7.08(e)

Since the BR is not forced because the definition of 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 force play strictly deals with RUNNERS being forced to advance by the BR.

Finally abandonment is only allowed to be called if the runner leaves the baseline (7.08(a))

So the BR is not forced at first and cannot be called out just for retreating to first, as long as it makes sense in the course of the play (read "trying to avoid the tag, etc.)





[QUOTE]Originally posted by teacherspit
[B]

Gentlemen I know in ASA that the second a BR stops and steps backwards he is called out. I like that rule. I know that baseball does not have that rule. But as Bob said it is an umpires judgement and there are ways to call a BR out backtracking to home.


Making a travesty of the game for one.

REVERSE BASE RUNNING RULE MYTH
In order to correct a base running mistake, the runner MUST retrace his steps and retouch the bases in reverse order. The only time a runner is out for running in reverse, is when he is making a travesty of the game or tries to confuse the defense.

Rules: 7.08(I), 7.10(b)


Your judgement!

[Edited by Kaliix on Jul 26th, 2004 at 01:24 PM]

Sorry, due to storms in the Atl area, I have been without the internet since Saturday. It's amazing how dependent we get on it!

Teacherspit:
There is no need for me to respond further to this absurd ruling of calling abandonment, or making a travesty out of the gaem. As others have put so well, this is absolutely a protestable situation, as it is a misapplication of the rules. Hiding behind, "in my judgment" does not remove this problem from the protest arena.

What you have tried to call is simply wrong, and is a disservice to the players, the coaches and to other umpires that have to follow you.

The rules of the game are both simple and complicated at the same time. You are trying to make up new rules. Don't try creating new law when the old ones work just fine.

Defense is at fault!!!
 

We posted this very same scenario at the beginning of Spring. As with that play, the batter dropped a bunt and the first baseman fielded it. Instead of playing smart defense, the fielder was duped and allowed the runner (R2 to go to third). The B/R does not have a time limit to get to first and is playing smart offense by stopping and walking backwards. As long as he does not pass home, he is just a base runner staying in the three foot running lane. The defense is at fault for worrying about him when the answer is simple...throw it to first.

While you will not likely see this above the Varsity HS level, it is not necessarily because the players are smarter and can execute this scheme. At college and beyond, you have more and better coaches watching and planning for every contingency.