|
Tue Feb 27, 2001, 02:32pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Rule on the following:
-R1, two outs. -Pitcher balks and delivers -R1 is off with the pitch, and is obstructed by F3 -Catcher interferes with the B1, but B1 smacks a single to right anyway -R1 misses second base on his way to third (not caused by the obstruction) -F9 bobbles the ball in right field. -R1 rounds third and is heading home when, seeing F9 gain control of the ball, R1 retreats back to third base. -B1 rounds second, and seeing R1 retreating back to third, he retreats back to second. -F9 throws to F4 to try to put out the retreating B1, and B1 unintentionally interferes with the throw. -The throw deflects off B1, skips by F4, bounces across the diamond, and dribbles through a hole in the fence and out of play. -Once play resumes, the defense properly appeals R1's miss of second base. Sort all that out, folks. Make the rulings, place the runners, how many score? Have fun!
__________________
Jim Porter 
|
|
Tue Feb 27, 2001, 02:49pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Since the baserunner did not advance one base (because of the appeal), then the balk is enforced. R1 to second, batter back in box
|
|
Tue Feb 27, 2001, 03:22pm
|
|||
|
|||
All runners, including the batter-runner are considered to have advanced at least one base on the play. [Ref. OBR 6.08(c)CMT, OBR 8.05 Penalty AR2]
The Balk and catcher's interference are ignored, and no options are available on the catcher's interference. F9's attempt to play on the BR at 2nd was not an obvious attempt to appeal R1's missed base. All runners are awarded to home on the ball thrown out of play, pending an appeal. [OBR 7.05(g)] R1 is out on the subsequent appeal for missing 2nd base. No runs score on the force out at 2nd by R1. [OBR 4.09(a)Exception (2), OBR 7.12] 3 outs. Half inning over. Cheers,
|
|
Tue Feb 27, 2001, 03:34pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Originally posted by Jim Porter
Rule on the following: -R1, two outs. -Pitcher balks and delivers -R1 is off with the pitch, and is obstructed by F3 -Catcher interferes with the B1, but B1 smacks a single to right anyway -R1 misses second base on his way to third (not caused by the obstruction) -F9 bobbles the ball in right field. -R1 rounds third and is heading home when, seeing F9 gain control of the ball, R1 retreats back to third base. -B1 rounds second, and seeing R1 retreating back to third, he retreats back to second. -F9 throws to F4 to try to put out the retreating B1, and B1 unintentionally interferes with the throw. -The throw deflects off B1, skips by F4, bounces across the diamond, and dribbles through a hole in the fence and out of play. -Once play resumes, the defense properly appeals R1's miss of second base. Jim we are playing under FED rules (Grin) right. Immediate Dead Ball forget all the other nonsense. Ok Ok Ok after eTeamz I wanted an easy one. here goes. Since all runners including BR advanced 1 base ignor both the Balk and the CI. Even though r1 missed second he is deemed to have touched it when making base awards. R1 obstructed by F3 is type "B" Obstruction so we have to wait until end of playing action before enforcing. Under Type "B" we make awards based upon where we would place the runner had there been no obstruction at all. Since F9 bobbled the ball and R1 was about to score, I would award r1 home. On a thrown ball the interference has to be INTENTIONAL and since you mentioned unintentional ignor and keep ball alive. Once ball is dead we call Time. On this type of play the first thing I'm going to do is Talk to my partner and say hey Smitty What do you have. Here's my ruling (while ball is dead) 1. We have obstruction and I award r1 home, r2 to third and B1 to second. 2. We have an overthrown ball - 2 bases from TOT, award r2 and B1 home At this time coach will probably come out and say hey Blue what about the Balk or the CI and at that point I would explain that all runners including BR advanced at least one base, hence the Balk and CI are ignored. Now here;s the fun part. I say play - Defense appeals the miss of second base and we say out. Since the out at second is a Force out - No Runs score - Head for your car as fast as you can. Ok Jim give us your answer tomorrow and BTW enough of these already, I'm running out of Advil. Pete Booth
__________________
Peter M. Booth
|
|
Tue Feb 27, 2001, 11:17pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hay Cobber,
You missed the obstruction on R1. He should be protected into second-- no appeal. Jim Porter youre a cruel man. (I cant do all that grin face stuff) rex
__________________
When you're green you'll grow When you're ripe you'll rot
|
|
Wed Feb 28, 2001, 01:00am
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Umpire Nightmare
Gee Jim,
What a coincidence. I had that very play just last year! Ha! Ha! :-) Dave Sirbu
|
|
Wed Feb 28, 2001, 07:07am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who me? Nah!
Quote:
Nah! I didn't miss that Type B obstruction by F3 on R1 between 1st and 2nd. I would have protected R1 at least to 2nd, and perhaps even to home given the subsequent play, but that shouldn't operate to remove the requirement for R1 to legally touch each base in order when advancing. I ignored the obstruction because R1 advanced beyond the base to which he would have been awarded on the obstruction. [see OBR 7.06(b)Comment] The fact that bases are awarded doesn't remove the obligation for the runner to touch all bases legally when advancing under the award. That principle equally applies when a runner is advancing under the protection of being an obstructed runner. He is still required to advance legally. I know, I know. R1 apparently didn't reach 2nd base "safely", as a consequence of the missed base appeal. OTOH, he certainly DID physically reach his protected base safely, and even advanced beyond it. The fact he failed to touch the base in advancing wasn't because the defense obstructed him and so prevented his legal advance. It was because he erred by missing the advance base and so failed by his own act to advance legally. Protecting the runner against his own stupid running can hardly be considered nullifying the act of obstruction in accordance with OBR 7.06(b)! Cheers,
|
|
Wed Feb 28, 2001, 06:39pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
THE ANSWER
Quote:
It seems the only part that confused a folk or two was whether, since R1 missed second base, he could be considered as having advanced at least one base to fulfill the balk and catcher's interference requirement. But most of you sorted that out - even though he missed the base, he still advanced at least one base because he "reached" that base. A missed base is the same as a base touched until an appeal is made. So here we have the solution: 1. Balk is called and it is a delayed dead ball. 2. Obstruction is called, and it is a Type B delayed dead ball. Protect R1 to at least second base. 3. Catcher's interference is called, and a delayed dead ball. 4. R1 advances at least one base when he misses second. 5. The bobble by F9 should have us revise R1's protection to at least third base. (possibly home based on your judgment) 6. B1's unintentional interference with a thrown ball is incidental, the play continues. 7. The ball enters dead ball territory, and time is imposed. 8. R1 and B1 are both awarded home plate on the overthrow. 9. R1 and B1 both advanced at least one base, and the balk, as well as the catcher's interference, is ignored. The play stands as is. 10. The appeal of R1 at second is viable, it is a force out, the third out, and no runs score. 11. The umpires run like hell. Keep an eye out for Umpire's Nightmare #2. I figured I'd make the first one easy. Just wait for #2!
__________________
Jim Porter
|
|
Wed Feb 28, 2001, 07:08pm
|
|||
|
|||
Did anyone notice...
... that not only did I manage to get the play right by Jim's solution but I also managed to do it in fewer words than ANYONE except for Max (Whowefoolin)?
Looks like those lessons in BREVITY and CONCISE wording are finally starting to pay off!  Cheers,
|
|
Sat Mar 10, 2001, 12:44pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thank you gentleman for sorting all of that out for me!
My only concern is the use of the term 'force out' for the appeal play on B1 at 2nd. The reason no run scores on appeal is not because of a force out!, but; "OBR 4.09 (a) EXCEPTION (3) by a preceding runner who is declared out because he failed to touch one of the bases." I particularly enjoyed the threaded discussion's attention to the detail of the missed base. Warren Willson's distinction of "his legal advance" counting in the determination of ignoring the balk and the catcher's interference and in its application to ruling on F3's obstruction on R1 was particularly informative!
|
|
Sat Mar 10, 2001, 05:53pm
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
If R1 had missed 3rd rather than 2nd, then you are quite correct that any appeal out on R1 at 3rd would not have been a force out but would still have prevented the following runners from scoring under OBR 4.09(a) Exception (3), as you correctly noted. In this case, however, if we had an R3 as well then his run WOULD have scored on the time play. Glad you enjoyed the discussion. Give Jim Porter's Umpire's Nightmare #2 a go as well. Cheers,
|
|
Sun Mar 11, 2001, 08:37pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Force out" semantics
Thanks again, Warren, for your informative reply on the umpire's nightmare. I meant R1 instead of B1, a typo error.
But as for the conditon of R1 at the time of the missed base, he would have been awarded 2nd as a result of the obstruction; so it still seems odd to refer to the appealed missed base as a force out. But, hey, I don't want to be argumenative. And, you all, probabably have years and years of experience beyond me. So I will chaulk it up as a learning experience in the fine art of umpire judgement wording! and from now on refer to a missed base appeal on a forced runner as a forced out. As for your example of a runner on 3rd in this play, I can imagine a bench clearing freeforall if I declared his run null on the 3rd out being a force out instead of a timing play! Particularly, because of the obstruction on R1. It is incredible to me that an umpire's ruling can become so complex! Thanks again for your response
|
|
Mon Mar 12, 2001, 12:14am
|
|||
|
|||
|
No problem...
Quote:
It may help if you think of the reason the force out applies is because this was a base running error by R1. Even though he would be awarded 2nd base on obstruction, that doesn't absolve him of his responsibility to touch all bases properly in taking his award. There is an example of this philosophy in OBR 7.10(b) Play (b), showing that despite an award of bases, the obligation is on the runner to touch each base awarded properly. Further evidence can be found in the Casebook Comments following OBR 7.05(i). It might also help if you note the difference between "reaching" a base and "touching" a base. Under OBR 7.06(b) a runner who "advances beyond" the base to which he would have been entitled does so at the risk of being tagged out. That does not require the base be touched. Further, the runner is deemed to have touched any missed bases until such time as there is an appeal. Therefore, in the case in point the runner is in jeopardy because he proceeded beyond his protected base AND his base running error was NOT the result of being obstructed but was instead his own error. Bottom line, Jim, is that sometimes baseball CAN be this complex, but all we need do to sort it out is to work through things in order. I hope this helps. If you still have any questions, pleased don't hesitate to email me at [email protected] and I'll be glad to help if I can. Cheers,
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
