When I have had a play at the plate where the runner missed home and is clearly safe I had a "no call" until he either tagged the plate or was tagged out. Now I'm wondering if this is the proper mechanic. Since he passed the base should it not be assumed that he touched it pending an appeal and a safe call being signaled? Or has tradition caused this to evolve in a no call? Any thoughts?

The correct mechanic is "no call". This puts neither team at a disadvantage and keeps the onus on the players to complete the play.

<i> Originally posted by gordon30307 </i>

<b> When I have had a play at the plate where the runner missed home and is clearly safe I had a "no call" until he either tagged the plate or was tagged out. Now I'm wondering if this is the proper mechanic. Since he passed the base should it not be assumed that he touched it pending an appeal and a safe call being signaled? Or has tradition caused this to evolve in a no call? Any thoughts? </b>

The NO Call at the plate involves a TAG attempt.

Example: R2, B1 singles to right. R2 is trying to score. F2 receives the ball and trys to tag R2 and misses R2, R2 in sliding also does not touch the base.

In the aforementioned, the proper mechanic is to say nothing, because in fact Nothing has happened.

However, let's assume B1 hits a gapper, R2 Scores easily but misses the plate. This situation is treated like any other appeal situation, meaning the runner is "assumed" to have touched the base unless properly appealed.

Therefore, in summary it depends upon the nature of the play that determines the mechanic. On a TAG attempt at the plate, the Proper mechanic is to say nothing until something happens. If the runner easily scores, then he is safe until properly appealed.

Pete Booth

Jim Evans advocates a safe mechanic on a force play only. (JEA). G.

Thanks, Pete. Your answer makes perfect sense.