"Force" redux

[greymule]

I thought of a play that might be a test of whether the BR reinstates the "force" at 1B if he retreats in the direction of home after touching 1B.

BR hits a fly to F9, runs to 1B, sees F9 about to catch the ball, and starts trotting back down the 1B line. F9 drops the ball, and the 1B coach yells, "Run!" BR, on the 1B line 30 feet from the plate, then runs across the infield directly to 2B.

When the ball is put into play, the defense appeals that the BR failed to retrace and touch 1B on his way to 2B.

Would you uphold the appeal?

[Huskerblue]

I would. For failure to touch a base (advancing or returning), or failure to tag up as soon as the ball is touched on a caught fly ball, the runner may be called out if an appeal is made by the defensive team.

[Jeremiah]

On appeal he would be out for failure to touch 1st base. You have to touch the last time you go by. The touch of 1st is removed once he re-traces his steps.

-Jeremiah

[greymule]

The touch of 1st is removed once he re-traces his steps.

I would say so, too. And if the touch of 1B is indeed removed, then if, while the BR stood 30 feet from the plate, the defense threw to ball to 1B and F3 stepped on the base, BR would be out, right?

[cbfoulds]

Originally posted by greymule
I thought of a play that might be a test of whether the BR reinstates the "force" at 1B if he retreats in the direction of home after touching 1B.

BR hits a fly to F9, runs to 1B, sees F9 about to catch the ball, and starts trotting back down the 1B line. F9 drops the ball, and the 1B coach yells, "Run!" BR, on the 1B line 30 feet from the plate, then runs across the infield directly to 2B.

When the ball is put into play, the defense appeals that the BR failed to retrace and touch 1B on his way to 2B.

Would you uphold the appeal?

Holy hard heads, batump!

Yes, I would uphold the appeal, but it has nothing to do with a "force" at 1st base. THERE IS NO "FORCE" @ 1st!! It thus follows that the "force" cannot be "reinstated".

By rule, advancing or retreating, the runner must touch each base in order; for failure to do which [on the "last time by"], R is out ON APPEAL when he or [by rule] the base is tagged by a defensive player in possession of the ball. The fact that it is not necessary to tag R's person in this situation has nothing to do with the play being a "force": it is because the rule on appealing a missed base explicitly provides for this proceedure. Trying to use this situation as a "precedent" to draw conclusions about other fact situations where BR touches 1st, but the "retreats' toward Home is seriously bad logic.

[Gee]

Are you trying to bring up 'touching bases out of order". Please don't go there.

In order to be guilty of touching bases out of order you have to touch more than one base.

In this case the only base touched is first so how can the runner be guilty of touching bases out of order? He might be guilty of passing or running bases out of order but the rule says TOUCHING. G.

[greymule]

seriously bad logic

I said it might be a test, not that I had concluded it was a test. The BR retreated toward home, but he has still has to make it to 1B, that's all. I still don't think we have the answer to this for 100% sure.

G, if your question about touching the bases out of order was directed to me: no, I was not thinking of anything along those lines.

[cbfoulds]

Originally posted by Gee
Are you trying to bring up 'touching bases out of order". Please don't go there.

In order to be guilty of touching bases out of order you have to touch more than one base.

In this case the only base touched is first so how can the runner be guilty of touching bases out of order? He might be guilty of passing or running bases out of order but the rule says TOUCHING. G.

Gee:
If this question is directed to me, I guess the answer is no, but I can't quite figure out what you are referring to.

My reference was to 7.10(b):

"Any runner shall be called out, on appeal, when ...
(b) With the ball in play, while advancing or returning to a base, he fails to touch each base in order before he, or a missed base, is tagged."

In greymule's scenario, BR touched 1st, "retreated" toward Home, then took off to [and winds up at] 2nd without re-touching 1st. The defense then appeals the miss of 1st (on the "last time by"). On these facts and 7.10(b), I would declare the runner out; however, this has NOTHING to do with "reinstating the force" at 1st. And, BTW, it also has nothing to do with "removing the touch of 1st" when the runner retreats. You will not find anything in the rule book about "removing the touch" in this set of circumstances.

[Edited by cbfoulds on Aug 4th, 2004 at 11:44 PM]

[jicecone]

Originally posted by greymule
The touch of 1st is removed once he re-traces his steps.

I would say so, too. And if the touch of 1B is indeed removed, then if, while the BR stood 30 feet from the plate, the defense threw to ball to 1B and F3 stepped on the base, BR would be out, right?

Support this with a rule or ruling. The runner touched first base and unless tagged before he gets to second, he is safe. There is No force involved here, as defined by the rules.

[greymule]

Support this with a rule or ruling.

I said from the beginning that this might be a test, which implies that it also might not be. I said if the touch of 1B is indeed removed, which means I don't know whether it is or not.

Of course there's nothing in the rule book about "removing the touch." I never said there was.

as defined by the rules

Well, it wouldn't be the first time that an interpretation contradicts the letter of the rules.

I don't have an ax to grind either way, but I still don't think we have a firm answer as to whether or not a BR who touches 1B and then retreats toward home has to be tagged. I don't see an answer in J/R or PBUC or BRD. And I've heard logical reasoning both ways.

[cbfoulds]

Originally posted by greymule
Support this with a rule or ruling.

I said from the beginning that this might be a test, which implies that it also might not be. I said if the touch of 1B is indeed removed, which means I don't know whether it is or not.

Of course there's nothing in the rule book about "removing the touch." I never said there was.

Really?

as defined by the rules

Well, it wouldn't be the first time that an interpretation contradicts the letter of the rules.

I don't have an ax to grind either way, but I still don't think we have a firm answer as to whether or not a BR who touches 1B and then retreats toward home has to be tagged. I don't see an answer in J/R or PBUC or BRD. And I've heard logical reasoning both ways.

Well, lets try out the "logic":

Can we agree with the following statements-
1.) By Rule Book definition, BR to 1st base is not a "Force Play";
2.) The rules governing the put out of BR at 1st decree that BR may be put out by tagging the base BEFORE BR touches the base;
3.) There are specific rules governing runner being out: on appeal for missing/ leaving early @ 1st, overrunning/ sliding & failing to return immediately; none of which mention a "force" being "reinstated";
4.) There are specific rules governing certain occurences at 2nd & third (& home) which ARE "force plays" by rule, and/or which DO mention the reinstatement of the "force" at bases OTHER than 1st;
5.) Absent a "Force Play" or a specific rule allowing a runner to be put out by the defense merely tagging the base, the runner himself must be tagged - tagging the bag won't do [ ex: BR tries to stretch a single to 2d, defense tags the base ahead of BR's arrival, but makes no effort to tag the runner - runner is safe.]?

If we agree on those, then I can't see why we are not "100% sure": if BR "touches 1st base" before being put out, but for some ineffable reason retreats toward Home, BR MUST BE TAGGED to complete the out [unless something else that makes BR out by rule (abandoning baseline, etc.) happens].

Now, it is worth acknowledging that such scenarios will happen rarely, if ever. And from a practical perspective, it is useful [and even customary] to regard BR as "forced" at 1st base.

But when/ if such a thing does happen, it will be important to "get it right" to correctly rule on the 3rd Out/ does the run score? issue. SINCE: BR to 1st is not a "force", and IF BR is put out for any reason AFTER touching the base, RUNS SCORE which cross the plate before the put out happens, even if BR is the 3rd Out.

I have yet to hear or read a LOGICAL argument for there being any force or reinstated force at 1st base.

Accepting that you merely proposed that the scenario which opened this thread MIGHT be a test of the "reinstated force" theory, I suggest that it has been adequately demonstrated that this is NOT such a test; and in the absence of any citation to a "rule or ruling" supporting the "reinstated force/ removed touch" theory [as called for by another poster], any reasonable person would be "100% convinced".

But, hey, some folks are just hardheads.

[Edited by cbfoulds on Aug 5th, 2004 at 02:31 PM]

Batter-runner to 1B is a force play. You state that "By Rule" this is not a force. Please provide an OBR reference.

Jaska/Roder, Chapter 6, says "A. Any runner (including the batter-runner) is out when (2) he is forced out...It is a force out when a forced runner fails to touch (or pass) his advance base...before hts person or the base is tagged..."

The force is reinstated on the batter-runner at 1B if he retreats towards home. Refer to OBR 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;"

[LDUB]

Originally posted by Prince
Batter-runner to 1B is a force play. You state that "By Rule" this is not a force. Please provide an OBR reference.

Jaska/Roder, Chapter 6, says "A. Any runner (including the batter-runner) is out when (2) he is forced out...It is a force out when a forced runner fails to touch (or pass) his advance base...before hts person or the base is tagged..."

The force is reinstated on the batter-runner at 1B if he retreats towards home. Refer to OBR 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;"

Read the definition of a force out man. I know that it is usually treated as a force out, but there are certain times when it is not.

2.0
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.

[Kaliix]

The reference is really easy. It is the definition of a force play

OBR 2.0 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 subject of the above defintion is a runner. Not the batter/runner. A force play is one in which the runners lose their right to their base because the batter gains the right to occupy first base, setting off the whole chain reaction that we know as the "force play"

The batter is the reason a force play happens, but he is not forced, he is just entitled to 1st base, thus forcing other runners.

Hence the play at first is not a force out, it is a put out.

Originally posted by Prince
Batter-runner to 1B is a force play. You state that "By Rule" this is not a force. Please provide an OBR reference.

Jaska/Roder, Chapter 6, says "A. Any runner (including the batter-runner) is out when (2) he is forced out...It is a force out when a forced runner fails to touch (or pass) his advance base...before hts person or the base is tagged..."

The force is reinstated on the batter-runner at 1B if he retreats towards home. Refer to OBR 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;"

[cbfoulds]

OBR 2.00 "Force Play".

There are at least 2 recent threads in which this was thrashed to death. I really cannot repeat all of it here. I think I may have reached the point where, if there are idiots out there who insist that BR is, by rule, "forced" at first, and that the "force" is "reinstated" if he retreats, I will simply leave them in their wilfull, but happy, ignorance; secure in the knowledge that none of them work with me, or if they do, I am heavily senior to them.

For what it is worth, the J/R text you cite does not say what you interpret it to mean. "Any runner [including BR] is out when ... forced ..." DOES NOT mean that BR is forced to 1st. This is a classical logic fallacy: because all runners who are forced are out when the base or their person are tagged, it DOES NOT FOLLOW that all runners who are out when the base or their person is tagged are, therefore, forced. [If that is not clear enough ( & I doubt it), try the non-baseball formula: All oranges are fruits; however, it does not follow therefore that all fruits are orange]

The BR going to 1st does not fit the definition of a Force Play [2.00], and there are specific rules which determine when BR is or is not out at 1st base [6.05(j), 6.09(b)cmt, 7.08(a)(2), 7.08(c), 7.08(j), 7.10(c), for instance.] Please note that none of these rules as they apply to the BR/1st play refers to it as a "force play".

BTW, 7.01 may help you understand why the play @ 1st is not a force per 2.00. Hint: does the Batter have the right to stay @ Home Plate "until forced to vacate it for another runner legally entitled to that base"? Also, see 7.08(i)cmt [hint: if BR "retreats" to the plate and stands thereon, can he be put out by tagging him?]. Bearing these rules and rulings in mind, tell me: does BR have a "right to occupy" Home which he can be "forced" from by reason of another runner becoming entitled to it?

So, to conclude:
THERE IS NO "FORCE" ON THE BR AT 1st;
it therefore follows that-
THE 'FORCE' IS NOT 'REINSTATED' if BR retreats toward Home AFTER touching 1st Base;
in which event- BR MUST BE TAGGED to be out.

Now, obviously, if there exisits out there, a black-letter rule or ruling which states, in so many words, that BR is "Forced" @ 1st, such that the "Force" is reinstated if he retreats after touching the base, and BR may thus be put out by merely tagging the base; and further, that if such a "reinstated force" @ 1st is the third out, no runs shall score: I will humbly stand corrected. But until that happens, my future silence in the face of hardhead idiot attempts to twist language and logic to "test" this point should not be interpreted as agreement.

--Carter

[Edited by cbfoulds on Aug 11th, 2004 at 10:32 AM]