Please read and let me know if my facts are correct.

[jesmael]

Is the rule myth often quoted by many people an incorrect use of terms? Tie deals with time, safe/out is the ruling.

Taken from eteamz…
THE TIE RULE MYTH
There is no such thing in the world of umpiring. The runner is either out or safe. The umpire must judge out or safe. It is impossible to judge a tie.

The umpire has the tough job of judging the timing of the act and then needs to rule base on the timing. Just as you can say it is impossible to judge a tie, you could also say the same in reverse. Let’s just examine a force out, for now. If you are viewing the runner touching the base and the ball being received, the timing can be so close that you can’t determine if one happened before the other, thus from a timing perception a “tie”. So from a timing perspective, you can have a tie, and that is totally independent from the rule aspect. How to rule if the act happened so close you can not determine if one happened before the other, meaning did the ball or the runner reach the base first

Lets look at the rules(OBR), 6.05 deals with a batter becoming a runner and 7.08 deals with a runner going to 2nd, 3rd, or Home.


6.05 A batter is out when_ (j) After a third strike or after he hits a fair ball, he or first base is tagged before he touches first base;

Here as it relates to time, the rule states the runner must be tagged before he touches first base. So if they were to happen at the same time, the runner would be safe because the runner was not tagged “before”.


7.08 Any runner is out when_ (e) He fails to reach the next base before a fielder tags him or the base, after he has been forced to advance by reason of the batter becoming a runner.

Here it states that the runner must reach the base before the ball, thus a perception of time being a tie, the runner would be out.

So in conculsion, tie goes to runner at first and tie goes to fielders at the other bases.


[Edited by jesmael on Jun 11th, 2005 at 08:21 AM]

[Tim C]

There are no ties.

You have done an excellent job in reading, reviewing and writing about a rule.

I have seen no one go into the detail you have.

What you have done is quote the two sections of OBR that actually conflict. We know (according to Jim Evans) there are 237 errors in the OBR. You have quoted one of them.

Some experts have noted that OBR "intentionally" made the 'tie' issue obscure. I don't think so.

Baseball is a game of a finite group of rules used to officiate an infinite number of situations. That is all they are.

You have disected the rule well . . . I am not sure it has much meaning as there is no difference between plays at first and the plays at other bases.

This is a well done study with what, in my opinion, is an incorrect answer.

We know through the studies made by the NBA and National Safety Board that the human eye/brain cannot determine what happens when two actions occur in .04th of a second.

Because of this "logic bridge" that is necessary for the human mind to operate drilling down on a rule this hard maybe a nice academic activity but has little to do with actual umpiring.

Nice post however.

[Edited by Tim C on Jun 11th, 2005 at 10:04 AM]

[GarthB]

As Tom Hanks said, there's no tying in baseball.

[PeteBooth]

Originally posted by jesmael

Is the rule myth often quoted by many people an incorrect use of terms? Tie deals with time, safe/out is the ruling.

Taken from eteamz…
THE TIE RULE MYTH
There is no such thing in the world of umpiring. The runner is either out or safe. The umpire must judge out or safe. It is impossible to judge a tie.

The myth was probably started from us when we were kids. We had no coaches, no umpires, NO PARENTS (thank God), etc. We made-up our own rules and one of them was:

If there was a Tie or the closest thing resembling a tie we would give it to the runner. BTW, this is why IMO,the brand of baseball has declined over the years. if the kids do not play organized ball, then they do not play at all but that is cause for another thread altogether.

Ok back to the thread.

Here's how I was taught to rule on the REAL close ones.

if the defense makes a "great" play, and the play is that close reward the defense.

Conversely, if the defense errs and B1 is busting it out of the box, reward the offense.

Other than the aformentioned, you do the best you can.

Pete Booth

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Jesmael,

You are operating under a misconception... and I don't mean the timing issue.

In today's society everyone seems to think they are a judge and jury. And that every decision made must be justifiable to anyone that wants to question it; and, my God, do we have a slew of people that want to question everyone's authority. What a total pain in the a$$. What an incredible obstacle to any kind of progress. ...Well let's stop and debate this. Let's see if Mr. Umpire really made the right decision. Let's develop some kind of a computer program that will determine a pitch's location and call it Questek. Let's make everything mathematically provable.

Yes, an umpire tries his best to use timing when making decisions about safe and out. But the real crux of the matter is not timing, that might be justifiable to the CAUSUAL observer. The real answer to whether a runner is safe or not, is whatever the umpire says.

Umpires do their best, but we still make timing mistakes. THE END RESULT (to the runner) IS WHATEVER THE UMPIRE SAYS. If the umpire says "out," then the runner is out. If he says "safe," then the runner is safe. He is not afforded the luxury of stopping to debate each decision. It would be an intractable impedance to the progress of the game if all umpires had to stop and consider some outsider's timing analysis before rendering their final decision.

Same goes for pitches. I don't know a single umpire that calls a precisely rectangular strike zone. Balls and strikes are umpire decisions. To turn every decision into a mathematically justifiable decision is, in my opinion, ludicrous. Perhaps some day it will happen and computers will run the whole show... but then we will have to come up with computized players because the ones we have now are no MORE capable than any umpire (and in most cases I would say LESS capable) to make decisions - like is that pitch going to be in the computerized strike zone and should I swing at it. Where exactly is the bottom of the hollow of the knee? And one fraction of a red thread inside the bottom outside corner of the prescribed zone is technically/justifiably a strike. The computer is going to call that a strike so I guess I better swing. Ooops too late. Is the shortstop gong to field that ball and should I speed up my running so I won't arrive at 1st after the ball - No! runners run full speed every time, or they get yelled at by their coach/manager/owner for being lazy and getting called out.

The real fact of the matter is that umpires like OUTS. And if they have an opportunity to call an "out," they likely will. In my opinion, they better.

That's my final decision... and as of yet, it's not debatable. Heaven forbid the day that it ever is.

Hugs and kisses to your "tie." OUT!

[cbfoulds]

Ties, my friends, go to the UMPIRE!
I've got an out.

[Rich]

Originally posted by PeteBooth
Originally posted by jesmael

Is the rule myth often quoted by many people an incorrect use of terms? Tie deals with time, safe/out is the ruling.

Taken from eteamz…
THE TIE RULE MYTH
There is no such thing in the world of umpiring. The runner is either out or safe. The umpire must judge out or safe. It is impossible to judge a tie.

The myth was probably started from us when we were kids. We had no coaches, no umpires, NO PARENTS (thank God), etc. We made-up our own rules and one of them was:

If there was a Tie or the closest thing resembling a tie we would give it to the runner. BTW, this is why IMO,the brand of baseball has declined over the years. if the kids do not play organized ball, then they do not play at all but that is cause for another thread altogether.

Ok back to the thread.

Here's how I was taught to rule on the REAL close ones.

if the defense makes a "great" play, and the play is that close reward the defense.

Conversely, if the defense errs and B1 is busting it out of the box, reward the offense.

Other than the aformentioned, you do the best you can.

Pete Booth

Don't reward anyone. Just call the freaking play.

[rickfriedmann]

Rich - well said. Can I use that?

[largeone59]

"When in doubt- call him out!"

[ozzy6900]

jesmael

The simple truth is this, I am the umpire. If you want me to call you safe, you have to prove to me that you are. If you "tie", as you say, you have proved nothing to me but the fact that you could not beat the throw soon enough to prove that you were better than the defense. I have no recourse but to call you out! Proving there again that a tie goes to the umpire!

[U of M Sam]

How about this: The sound of the ball hitting the glove (catch) is a different sound than the runners foot hitting the base. See it (also listen); process it; call it. Runner is either "out" or "safe" (no ties).

[U of M Sam]

Regarding Pete Booth's comment about rewards:
We as umpires need to have the courage to make the "tough call" (correct call) not the "expected" call. Umpires are there to call the game fair and correct as possible-not to determine "rewards" based on the athletes skills (or lack of skills).

[kylejt]

All those who say there are no ties are wrong.

The others that are openminded enough to consider a tie, and with to call the runner out, are also incorrect.

In the first case, please understand that the human senses are limited. Physics, and the ability to decern events far beyond the reach of us mortals is not so limited. So a ball hitting a mitt, and foot hitting bag, can very well happen at the same time, as far us humans are concerned. Admit it, or not, sometimes you just can't tell.

As far as the rules goes, it's up to the defense, or the ball if you will, to beat the runner. Always has been.

I will grant you, on the molecular side, there in no such thing as a tie. For those of you wish to perpetuate the fact the you can, indeed, decern this in every play, well, more power to you.

Me, I'm just a regular guy, with no superhuman powers. So the tie does go to the runner.

[GarthB]

Originally posted by kylejt
All those who say there are no ties are wrong.

It was only a matter of time.

[Kaliix]

That was great. You first say that all those who say that there are no ties are wrong and then go on to say that really there are no ties. You are a walking contradiction.

Ties go to the umpire, I like that.

If the runner doesn't beat the ball, he is out! IMHO

Originally posted by kylejt
All those who say there are no ties are wrong.

The others that are openminded enough to consider a tie, and with to call the runner out, are also incorrect.

In the first case, please understand that the human senses are limited. Physics, and the ability to decern events far beyond the reach of us mortals is not so limited. So a ball hitting a mitt, and foot hitting bag, can very well happen at the same time, as far us humans are concerned. Admit it, or not, sometimes you just can't tell.

As far as the rules goes, it's up to the defense, or the ball if you will, to beat the runner. Always has been.

I will grant you, on the molecular side, there in no such thing as a tie. For those of you wish to perpetuate the fact the you can, indeed, decern this in every play, well, more power to you.

Me, I'm just a regular guy, with no superhuman powers. So the tie does go to the runner.