R1, R3.

In order to cause confusion, R1 takes off into the RF area . The hope is that the defense will be confused and somehow allow R3 to score.

Someone told me that a HS coach did this in a game last week.

I can't see anything in OBR that would make it illegal.

Anything?

Nope, perfectly legal. This is called "skunk in the outfield."

Heard about it, but never seen it. It don't sound very smart to me.

What if I changed the scenario a bit.

R1 takes off from first and heads out towards RF. F1 steps off the mound and throws to 2nd. Could you say he is out for being out of baseline and is attempting to avoid being tagged?

No, R1 is not avoiding a tag if F1 throws to 2nd. A runner avoids a tag when there is a tag attempted on him.

R1 is not doing anything wrong here. Simply put, he can run all the way to the outfield fence, turn and run to 2nd base and if no one tags him, he is safe. Now if F4 is waiting on the outfield grass as R1 is headng to 2nd and R1 deviates more than the preverbial 3 feet as F4 is trying to tag R1, then R1 has violated the rules and can be called out.

He can't be called out for being out of baseline unless the ball is being held in the baseline and a tag being attempted. Actually, once the defense starts to attempt a play, the baseline is then established between the point the runner is at (even if hes in right field) and the next base hes attempting to reach. The "baseline" doesn't necessarily have to be between 2 bases.


Edit : Ozzy beat me to it .

Mavis Beacon Speed Typing 101 :D

As a coach, this is an easy fix... wait until he's far, far away, watch the runner at 3rd, and then simply get on the mound and pitch. This bozo is likely to end up an out.

All;

Good umpires do not allow s$$$ like this in their ballgames. Yes it is legal but:

1. You will never see it on television.

2. Because you will never see it on televsion, you, the umpire will be blamed for the things that go wrong when this play is attempted. The other coach will be in your face. In evaluations or umpires, s$$$houses in games count against an umpire.

3. Big dogs like me will watch the circus that occurs and hold you, the umpire, accountable for the circus. When I see weird stuff like this in ballgames, I blame the umpire more than the coach. How the umpire responds has a lot to do with whether or not I recommend him for promotion.

4. There are a lot of things that the umpire can do to stop such nonsense. Because it never occurs on television, the umpire's reactions in shutting down this play cannot be evaluated against a standard. The lack of a standard gives the umpire wide latitude in dealing with this. Take it from a big dog. End this before it starts.

Calling out the runner for being out of the baseline is not the right way to go. I guarantee, however, that this play would never get off the ground in a game that I was doing. And if I saw it work in one of your games that I was watching, I would mark you down as not ready for the big time. The next time that you are tempted to allow something like this, remember that a big dog who controls your future may be watching.

Peter

Which is why I'm amazed that this play is still successful at times (few and far between of course). It would be an awful easy force out at 2nd.

Im not arguing with you HHH, I'm just trying to see where you are coming from. The fact of the matter is, I have heard of the play once, it was successful. You may get a s***house from the defensive coach for not doing anything, but what about the s***house your going to get from the offensive coach for taking a play away from him? Under what rule can we kill the play? Could a "travesty of the game" penalty be invoked here? I really believe this is a lose/lose situation, but do we save the defense if they're actually ignorant enough to pursue this play?

What would your ruling be based on? That's what I'm looking for. I don't like the play but if I was the umpire, I would need an actual rule in order to invoke, right?

Now what would I do here if I were on TV? Now that's not a thought that crosses my mind when I'm doing a 10u game.

Mike

OBR 7.08 a(1) says :

a runner is out when he runs more than 3 feet away from a direct line between the bases to avoid being tagged...


That would seem to go against your interpretation of where the baseline is established. That wording would seem to indicate that as soon as F4 went to RF to tag the runner that he would be out as soon as he tries to avoid the tag by F4 since he's more than 3 feet away from the direct line between the bases.

I'm not an umpire . I'm just trying to find backing for your interpretation.

Peter, I do not like the play either but I would like you to tell us all how you would stop this play and by what rules you will do this! The only way that I can see that an umpire can stop this play is to make up rules as he goes along!

The key word is "to avoid being tagged". Leaving the path that you were taking to the base in order to avoid a tag being placed on you AT that time. You can take any path from base to base you want to, but if the fielder is in your way with the ball and tries to tag you, once you try to get around the fielder by leaving the "baseline", your out.

Trolling today, HHH?

Logically, I understand what you're saying.

However, the wording in the rules that says "direct line between the bases" as the basis for the 3 feet boundary seems to contradict that.

In our example, at what point in the play has F4 established the 'baseline'? How close does he have to be in order for the runner to be avoiding the tag? Is the baseline a direct line between F4 and the runner at the time F4 starts out towards him?

There seems to be too many open interpretations using your logic and , again, it goes against what the wording seems to be saying.

It's so universally known that the interp manuals don't cover it. Trust us, the runner establishes his own baseline.

Thank you Rich, I was looking for an easy way to say that!

Never seen this and never heard of it happening. You agree it's legal and you say this will never happen in your game. Assume that it does what are you going to do? Can't call the runner out for being out of the baseline how are you going to rule on this? All the Big Dogs are watching.

Ozzy,

O ye of littel faith. Come on, this is "His High Holiness".

Just state that. "Coach, in accordance with "His High Holiness", this is not allowed" amen.

There , now at least YOU don't have to make something up, I did it for you.

You don't see this on TV because it would be an easy out for any team that would be playing on TV, thus it is not attempted.

That's exhibit 1 in the 743 (or some such number) "known errors" in OBR.

Ahhhh, is there a different resource that is more accurate? Or is the OBR the reason there is the cottage industry of Interpretation Books?

Spence, don't be a troll.

If your interp was right, then EVERY SINGLE TIME a runner rounded first on his way to 2nd on a double, he'd be out. And every time someone in MLB led off from 2nd (they all do it diagonally), they'd be out.

Get real.

No, Several years ago a couple of umpires and I sat down and did the physics, and this would be possible. Follow me for a minute:

When I played NCAA baseball, the coach told us that a ball needed to be hit at least 270 feet into the outfield in order for a reasonably fast runner to score on a fly ball from third. If the outfielder had a strong arm, then 300 feet might me needed. Consider:

1. R1 on first leading off 12-15 feet can get to second in two throws by the defense, one of 60 feet and the other of 127 feet. Thus, the runner travels about 75 feet in the same time that it takes two players to throw the ball 187 feet.

2. In college, during drills we proved that a player could run 90 feet in the same time that it took an outfielder to wind up and throw 270-300 feet (with a bounce of course).

Imagine an MLB player who overruns first on a base hit and heads out to straight away right field, exactly 200 feet from home plate with a runner on third. As the second baseman walks out to tag him, the runner on third leads off. R1, in right field, plants his feet firmly in the ground and does not move. If F4 throws to F9 to tag R1, from (1) above we know that R3 has plenty of time to scamper home. TWO throws would total obout 300 feet. That's an extra .5 -1.0 second that would be needed for the second fielder to wind up over and above the what was required in (2) above.

On the other hand, if F4 continues walking towards R1 above, R3 can continue increasing his lead from third. Somewhere around 150-180 feet from home (and still at least 20 feet from R1) R3 will have attained a 45 foot lead from third base. At this point, home plate is as close as third and R3 can scamper home.

So, this play is physically possible but you never see it. Why not? I maintain that an MLB umpire would put a stop to it for a number of reasons. Furthermore, although this play has gained internet legend status as legal, I believe that an umpire has authority under the rules to stop it. Here is why:

Prior to each pitch, there is an assumed period of relaxed action where:

1. The umpire can call time and dust off home plate.

2. The pitcher can request a new ball.

3. The catcher can request time to go talk to the pitcher

4. The coach can request time to visit the mound.

5. The batter can request time to do whatever.

With this crazy play, there is no period of relaxed action. If the catcher wants to visit the pitcher, he cannot call time because there is still a play to be made. Since there is no relaxed action, the 20 second clock does not start on the pitcher to pitch, and he could sit down near the mound and wait for R1 to make his next move. You, the umpire, could not enforce the 20 second rule because a play was still being made.

If you did call time, R1 would have to return to first before you could put the ball in play. If the batter tried to protect him by stepping out of the box, time is called and R1 must return to first. Then the pitcher could do a quick but legal delivery before R1 could get back to right field.

The list of f$$$ ups and bizarre stuff goes on and on. This is the reason that this play would never be allowed in MLB.

The umpire is on shaky ground when trying to deal with this since there is no clear written rule. He does not want a protest. One thing he can do is to continually call time as R1 moves to right field. A better alternative is to eject R1 and put in a replacement for him on first. Ejections are not protestable, since in a strict sense of the word, there has been no lost outs, runs, or strikes to the offensive team. Potential hits by the number 4 batter do not count in figuring out if an action by an umpire changed the outcome of the game. Thus an umpire can always enforce his will by an ejection without fear of protest. You do not even have to have a credible reason for a an ejection.

MLB is like the movie "Fiddler on the Roof. " Tradition rules. They are extremely sensitive to tradition. An MLB umpire would easily get away with ejecting R1 for making a travesty of the game.

Prior to WWI, I believe, (situation R3, R1, and R1 stealing) an MLB catcher threw a potato hidden in his glove to second. (in order to fool R3) He then fired the real ball to third getting R3. Despite lack of a rule regarding potatos, the umpire put R3 back on third and ejected the catcher. The umpire actions were upheld on protest. I would bet that a similar fate would befall R1 for trying the skunk in right field play and that is why you do not see this play on television.

Peter

Peter: Don't be too sure it isn't seen on TV. Some of our high school games are televised, and several teams use this "ploy." It was invented by a Little League coach in the senior league (where they can lead off) in New York state.

It is often successful at high school and below. I've seen it tried a couple of times at JUCO - to dismal failure.

At our coaches meeting in January, the subject came up: "What can we do on defense?"

I said: "Cut him off at the pass." Station F4 directly between him and second; station F3 directly between him and first. Throw it to the second baseman and have him sprint toward the runner. (Of course, you keep your eye on third base.) There's simply no way the runner can reach any base safely, so the only question is: Can the defense score an out on R3 (forget about R1) if he commits to home?

If you'll check the BRD, you find that PBUC has ruled the runner may lead off any way he wishes from any base. (Section 411)

Agreed, Peter. Simply call time when R1 begins this bush league maneuver prior to anyone making a play on him. After he comes back to first and the ball is put in play, if he does it again, call time again. And again, and again.

Why are we calling time? Oh, I dunno, maybe to tie my shoelaces or get some dirt out of my eye or, or, or.....

I would love to be the coach of the team where you as umpire engaged in such behavior totally unsupported by the rules.

You're kidding, of course?

I discussed this play with Mike Fitzpatrick. His official interpretation is that it's ok for the runner to this.

But you don't care, right? <i>YOU</i>, not the rules, are the important thing on your field.

Silly, me. Sorry Peter, I'm not allowed to agree with you. Carl is right. Carl is is always right. I am wrong. You are wrong. When will we ever learn?

Come to think of it, there is really no need for this forum. Why waste time exchanging opinions and thoughts when all we really need is for Carl to post the one true answer to begin with? Hell, everyone should just buy the BRD and sell their computers.

Not sure what a 'troll' is but thanks for the advice.

You obviously didn't read ALL of my post. NOwhere did my 'interp' deal with runners rounding bases. It only dealt with runners locations when a play was made.

Let me know if I need to type bigger or slower.

Ok, your sophomoric sarcasm aside, talk about the play. Is Fitzpatrick wrong? Where's the citation to support your call on this play? FED 8-?-?. OBR 7.?(?)

Spence.

Check the NFHS rulebook on this matter. The OBR rulebook doesn't have the interpretation of where the baseline is established, but the FED book does. I'm not sure what rule number being I don't have my book in front of me. Look in FED rule 8, when a runner is out. It mentions the 3 foot baseline and has a note underneath it about how the baseline is established. I hope this helps.


P.S. A troll is someone who posts on a message board with the sole intention of inciting somebody to insult or flame another or themselves. I don't beleive you were trolling, you just took the rule as it was read. The NFHS has put this interp in their rulebook, OBR hasn't. Its implied in OBR that the runner etablishes his own baseline.

[Edited by aevans410 on Apr 30th, 2005 at 08:19 AM]