http://www.uwsp.edu/athletics/baseball/2005/Stout.htm

I'm glad to see you weren't on this one Rich. This sounds like a mess!!

Interesting issue. I would assume abandonment would be the reason for calling the runner out. Guideline for a runner on 2B would be when he crosses a foul line, which this runner did not do. But let's suppose he did, but the runner from 3d crossed the plate before the abandonment call? Is this a timing play, ie abandonment came after the winning run scores? Does the runner from 2b have to touch 3b, or just not be called out for abandonment before the runner on 3b scores? Hmmm...

You are correct that this would be a timing play. If the runner from third scored before the abandonment of R2, then the run would count, absent an appeal from the defense. However, even if R3 scored before R2 abandoned, the defense would still have the opportunity to appeal that R2 did not touch third. And if they did, the run would not score because the appeal against R2 at third base would be a force out and no runs can score when the third out is a force play. However, I would not consider R2 to have abandoned until he had reached the dugout. In addition, without knowing the specifics of this situation, I think that in general by calling R2 out in this situation you are really taking the short end of the stick as an umpire. R2 is an idiot, but the team scored the winning run and absent a clear case of abandonment, I would let the run score and go home.

I was elsewhere on Saturday, B'Gosh.

The key thing to remember on this play is that a BB is an AWARD. The only runners required to advance in this situation are the BR and R3.

[Edited by Rich Fronheiser on Apr 6th, 2005 at 10:32 AM]

According to J/R this is not a time play. As long as the BR touches 1st base and R3 touches home the run scores.

That's true for OBR, not true for FED -- and I don't know for NCAA (which this was).

This seems to be one of those, "There is no reason for FED to be different than OBR" rules.

Making changes for the sake of making changes...

Bob, what is the Fed Ruling and rule ref?

I'm not sure why having different rule sets is that big of a deal -- we deal with it in every other sport, too.

Nothing wrong with different sets of rules. Every age group here has a different set of rules.

There's nothing wrong with having different sets of rules. It is when FED makes changes for reasons other than
1)increased participation/substitution
2)force play slide
3)malicious contact
4)equipment specifications
that they are likely making changes for the sake of making changes.

OBR work fine the large majority of the time.

I hate to sound like a FED apologist, but what about when OBR changes the rules -- should the FED just go along with those changes? I mean, balks used to be immediately dead in the pro book.....maybe FED has it right.

Most of the time I hear these complaints, it's from umpires that really don't study ANY of the rules (this is not directed toward anyone here, just a general observation). We had a meeting of umpires last week where some guys that have been calling college ball for 25 years tried to apply the FED balk rule to games played under OBR (they argued that all balks are immediately dead). It's just sad.

Most of the rule differences are easy to remember if one just takes the time to learn the differences in the first place. Even so, before my first college game this season, I looked through the rules that I always seem to forget -- number of conferences allowed, for example. Once I'm on the field, I know exactly what I need to know. I hope.

It sounds like this protest situation doesn't have ANY specific language covering it for NCAA rules. Except in J/R, that is, and that has nothing to do with NCAA rules. Of course, I haven't had the time to actually research this....but when the HS rules specifically require the runners to advance to the next base and the other rulesets are pretty quiet about the whole thing, I can understand why the umpires ruled as they did.

--Rich

[Edited by Rich Fronheiser on Apr 7th, 2005 at 12:58 PM]

OK,
 

Rich, I was informed by Dave Yeast that when NCAA rules do not cover a specific situation that we are to "default" to OBR, does this begin to give you a direction to make assumptions about this specific play?

Re: OK,
 

Tee, I understand that. And I have all the direction I need to rule accordingly :)

But this ruling is only available in the J/R and (I'm guessing) the BRD. Again, I understand why this ruling could be made. That's all I was saying.

Why is it a different issue? What makes the foul line special?