A Doozy of a Rule Question

[UMP25]

Here's one I want to share with the masses here. I'm curious to see what the line of thinking on this is from people here.

R3 on third with two outs and a 2-2 count on the batter. The next pitch is a wild pitch on which the batter swings for a strike three. As he takes off safely to first on the third strike not caught, R3 scampers home. The defensive manager quickly comes out to appeal that the batter-runner was the improper batter and that the offense has batted out of order. The plate umpire confirms this, declares out the guy who should have batted, removes the B-R from first, and...?

Here's the question for you: do you count R3's run?

I've had some serious discussions with people on this, and literally, the answers I've received are split 50/50. Half the guys say no run because the final out of the inning was failure of a [proper] batter to reach first base. The other half says the run counts because R3 scored on a wild pitch independent of the batter's actions, and that this run didn't actually occur on the "play where the batter failed to reach first."

I'll share my thoughts later. I'm simply curious to see what you guys think on this interesting play.

[briancurtin]

im pretty sure you shouldnt count the run

6.07(b)(2) says "nullify any advance or score made because of a ball batted by the improper batter or because of the improper batter's advance to first base on a hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batter, or otherwise."

he advanced to first base on a dropped 3rd strike, falling under the "otherwise" category. i believe the run should not be counted.

(edited for grammar)

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by briancurtin
im pretty sure you shouldnt count the run

6.07(b)(2) says "nullify any advance or score made because of a ball batted by the improper batter or because of the improper batter's advance to first base on a hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batter, or otherwise."

he advanced to first base on a dropped 3rd strike, falling under the "otherwise" category. i believe the run should not be counted.

(edited for grammar)

1. I'm pretty sure you should count the run. The point of the rule: Runners may not advance as a result of any action of the batter. This guy advanced on his own.

2. On the hand, I'm pretty sure you shouldn't count the run for the reason you stated: The batter-runner was the third outg before he touched first safely.

Here's how to figure it out: Bases loaded, two outs, B1 doubles, tries for third, and gets tagged out. Three runs score.

But no!

The defense appeals that B1 missed first, and the umpire agrees. It's an advantageous fourth out, and no runs score.

In your improper-batter scenario, the third out was made before the batter-runner reached first safely.

Of the two rulings, I'm most fond of number 2.

[BigUmp56]

This is not that complex of a question IMO. The rule Brian cited is specific to this scenario.

I don't understand why Carl felt the need to cloud the issue with two answers. This is a BOO appeal, not a missed base appeal.

The B/R is called out for the 3rd out on a proper appeal, as he had completed his at bat and is now a runner.

It wouldn't matter if the bases were loaded and the runners were forced to advance. The appeal would still nullify the advance of all runners. Why the need to mention R3 advanced on his own?

Tim.

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by BigUmp56


This is not that complex of a question IMO. The rule Brian cited is specific to this scenario.

I don't understand why Carl felt the need to cloud the issue with two answers. This is a BOO appeal, not a missed base appeal.

The B/R is called out for the 3rd out on a proper appeal, as he had completed his at bat and is now a runner.

It wouldn't matter if the bases were loaded and the runners were forced to advance. The appeal would still nullify the advance of all runners. Why the need to mention R3 advanced on his own?

Tim.

Well, gosh, Tim, I mentioned it only because that's what happened.

BTW: Learning by contrast has been a valid method for hundreds of years.

[BigUmp56]

Originally posted by Carl Childress

Well, gosh, Tim, I mentioned it only because that's what happened.

BTW: Learning by contrast has been a valid method for hundreds of years.

Carl,

In your first answer you imply that the run should be scored, as R3 advanced on his own.

My point is, it is irrelevant as to whether or not he advanced on his own, or was forced. No matter how you slice it the illegal action of the improper batter nullifies the run.

While I agree that learning by contrast is a long standing tradition, I just don't see much of a comparative analysis between the two situations you have layed out.


Tim.

[DG]

When I coached, and my scorekeeper told me that a batter was out of order, it was SOP for me to say nothing, on the precept that I had an out, if the at bat was completed, and maybe two, if a double play resulted. What if the guy walked, with bases loaded, and then appeal made the he was out of order? Would we score the run? I hope not. So if he advances to 1b while a runner from 3rd crosses the plate on a passed ball, but is then called out for out of order, is there a difference?

What if the runner from 3rd was stealing on the pitch and touched the plate an instant before a 3rd strike was called? What if he touched the plate an instant before ball 4 was called? What if he was hit by a pitch in the strike zone, while stealing home?

Interesting question, but I like to think my coaching SOP was valid, ie I have an out when he completes his at bat, one way or the other. And if it's the 3rd out, no runs score.

[UMP25]

Originally posted by BigUmp56
No matter how you slice it the illegal action of the improper batter nullifies the run.

Tim.

But does it, Tim? As we know, a runner who advances due to a balk, wild pitch/pass ball, or who steals a base while an improper batter is at bat can remain on his advance base. So, wouldn't this permit R3 to score?

On the other hand, if we employ Jim Evans's "common sense and fair play" philosophy, one might legitimately argue that R3 shouldn't score because (a) the batter's failure to reach first was the final out, (b) R3 advanced during an improper batter's dropped third strike.

Now, despite this, one might say, yeah, so? "A" or "B" might be good, but even if the proper batter was at the plate, R3 would score on the dropped third strike.

This one alone is enough to give people a serious migraine. I think my head hurts already.

[briancurtin]

Originally posted by UMP25
But does it, Tim? As we know, a runner who advances due to a balk, wild pitch/pass ball, or who steals a base while an improper batter is at bat can remain on his advance base. So, wouldn't this permit R3 to score?

advancing/scoring while an improper batter is up seems different to me than advancing/scoring as a result of the advancement of an improper batter (which is the ruling i posted about). in the original situation, the guy scored/advanced on a play in which the batter becomes a BR, which seems different to me than scoring/advancing on a play (such as a balk) while the batter is still a batter and has not become a runner yet (like the situation in the post that i quoted.

that could make no sense, im tired as hell

[UMP25]

OK, let's assume for a moment that the B-R did NOT advance, forgetting it was a dropped third strike. R3 scores, the catcher retrieves the ball and tags a dumbfounded B-R still standing at the plate for out #3. Do you count the run or not?

If that doesn't get you more frustrated, nothing will.

[LDUB]

Originally posted by UMP25
OK, let's assume for a moment that the B-R did NOT advance, forgetting it was a dropped third strike. R3 scores, the catcher retrieves the ball and tags a dumbfounded B-R still standing at the plate for out #3. Do you count the run or not?

If that doesn't get you more frustrated, nothing will.

That one is easy. The BR is out for the third before reaching first. No runs can score on such play.

[ozzy6900]

Originally posted by UMP25
Here's one I want to share with the masses here. I'm curious to see what the line of thinking on this is from people here.

R3 on third with two outs and a 2-2 count on the batter. The next pitch is a wild pitch on which the batter swings for a strike three. As he takes off safely to first on the third strike not caught, R3 scampers home. The defensive manager quickly comes out to appeal that the batter-runner was the improper batter and that the offense has batted out of order. The plate umpire confirms this, declares out the guy who should have batted, removes the B-R from first, and...?

Here's the question for you: do you count R3's run?

I've had some serious discussions with people on this, and literally, the answers I've received are split 50/50. Half the guys say no run because the final out of the inning was failure of a [proper] batter to reach first base. The other half says the run counts because R3 scored on a wild pitch independent of the batter's actions, and that this run didn't actually occur on the "play where the batter failed to reach first."

I'll share my thoughts later. I'm simply curious to see what you guys think on this interesting play.

I think that because the B1 was an improper batter and the appeal was upheld. The proper batter is called out and this causes a third out in which the batter-runner did not make it to 1st base. In this type situation, no run scores.

[Matthew F]

Originally posted by briancurtin

advancing/scoring while an improper batter is up seems different to me than advancing/scoring as a result of the advancement of an improper batter (which is the ruling i posted about). in the original situation, the guy scored/advanced on a play in which the batter becomes a BR, which seems different to me than scoring/advancing on a play (such as a balk) while the batter is still a batter and has not become a runner yet (like the situation in the post that i quoted.

that could make no sense, im tired as hell

You got it Brian.

There is no penalty if the improper batter is replaced by the proper batter while at bat. The proper batter assumes the current count and all runner advancements stand.

Ozzy nailed this one. If the improper batter gets on base, the defense must appeal before pitching to the next batter or before any (attempted) play is made. The proper batter is called out (not the B/R) and all runner advancements are nullified during the improper batter's advance to first base.

[Blue19]

or, if R3 scored on strike 2 wild pitch, then there's no problem, run scores continue the at bat. But B/C it happened on a pitch that resulted in a play on the BR, then no runs can score.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by UMP25

Here's the question for you: do you count R3's run?

Randy --

I agree with those that do NOT score the run. Change the play a little: Dropped third strike, but F2 blocks the ball. R3 does not advance, but F2 throws the ball wildly to RF attempting to retire BR. Now R3 comes home, and then the BOO is appealed. I think it's "more clear" here that the advance was due to the actions of the improper batter, and I think that the ruling in the original case has to be the same.