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.

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.

Hmmmmmmmmm........
 

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.

Re: Hmmmmmmmmm........
 

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.

Re: Re: Hmmmmmmmmm........
 

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.

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.

Re: Re: Re: Hmmmmmmmmm........
 

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. :D

Re: Re: Re: Re: Hmmmmmmmmm........
 

advancing/scoring <i>while</i> an improper batter is up seems different to me than advancing/scoring <i>as a result of the advancement</i> 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

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.

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.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hmmmmmmmmm........
 

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.

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.

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.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hmmmmmmmmm........
 

[/B][/QUOTE]

You got it Brian.


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. [/B][/QUOTE]

Absolutely NOT. I'm not sure if that's what Ozzy was trying to say, but your comment about it is not correct. All advancements are not nullified in a BOO. Wild pitches, balks, wild pick off throws and stolen bases are allowed. As long as the action has nothing to do with the improper batter's actions, then the advance is allowed. Here, since we're talking about an R3 only situation, you have to ask yourself if the R3 is advancing because of the wild pitch, or because the batter decided to run to 1st on the dropped 3rd strike. If it wasn't a dropped third strike, and just a wild pitch on ball 2, then the run would score.

[Edited by JEAPU2000 on Aug 26th, 2005 at 01:27 PM]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hmmmmmmmmm........
 

You got it Brian.


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.[/QUOTE]

Absolutely NOT. I'm not sure if that's what Ozzy was trying to say, but your comment about it is not correct. All advancements are not nullified in a BOO. Wild pitches, balks, wild pick off throws and stolen bases are allowed. As long as the action has nothing to do with the improper batter's actions, then the advance is allowed. Here, since we're talking about an R3 only situation, you have to ask yourself if the R3 is advancing because of the wild pitch, or because the batter decided to run to 1st on the dropped 3rd strike. If it wasn't a dropped third strike, and just a wild pitch on ball 2, then the run would score.

[Edited by JEAPU2000 on Aug 26th, 2005 at 01:27 PM] [/QUOTE]

Sorry to confuse you, JEAPU2000. I intentionally used paragraphing and the sentences within those paragraphs were related and supported the "topic" of the paragraph.


This paragraph dealt with the improper batter being replaced while still at bat (topic). Note that I indicated "all runner advancements stand" (supporting statement).

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.

The next paragraph dealt with the improper batter reaching base and subsequent BOO appeal (topic). Note that I indicated "all runner advancements are nullified" (supporting statement).

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.

One thing that I did fail to mention in the last paragraph is that the B/R is also removed (as if his at bat never occured). The batter following the proper batter (who was called out) in the batting order, bats next.

Before the third strike not caught (e.g., WP with less than 2 strikes, balk, etc.), the BOO can be corrected if the offense wakes up or the defense "appeals" prematurely. Does the completion of the time at bat, and ripening of the BOO appeal (others have said batter becoming BR) provide the distinction as to whether the run would be counted or the advancements nullified?

Matthew....gotya. Sorry, it sounded a little strange when I read it. I guess I should read everything more closely before I open my big mouth.

gotblue,


6.07(a)(1) Provides for the improper batter to be replaced by the proper batter at any time prior to the improper batter completing his time at bat, and assume the existing count. If R3 scores before the completion of the at bat by the improper batter, the run scores.

6.07(a)(2) Provides for the run to be nullified if the improper batter has completed his time at bat AND in doing so becomes a BR, AND is properly apealed. If the appeal is upheld for the third out, no run may score.


Tim.

I guess that is what my instinct was telling me. In addition, I read some of the previous responses more carefully. I am left wondering why there would be a controversy/dispute as to whether the run would or would not have been scored in the example given initially.

Bob,

I had been leaning this way even after giving much thought to what has been discussed here and among several of my peers not related to this esteemed board. I do believe that the arguments for scoring a run do tend to have some legitimacy to them, which isn't often the case in sticky rule situations.

If I use a "common sense and fair play" approach, then I'd be saying do not count the run because R3 scored on a play involving the final out being the result of a batter to legally reach first base. Perhaps I'll just leave it at that before someone tries to convince me with an otherwise logical counterpoint. :D

The rule says "nullify any advance or score made ... because of the improper batter's advance to first base on ... or otherwise."

Yes, the improper batter advanced to first. But, was R3's advance to home *because* BR advanced to first? Or was it just *coincidental* to BR's advance to first (R3 advanced *because* of the wild pitch, not because B1 became BR). That's the controversy.

I think the NOTE at the end of 6.07(b) makes it clear -- if the advance is *during* the (illegal) at bat, it stands. In the play presented, the advance was after the at-bat (B1 had become BR -- see 6.04), so the runner must return (or, since this was the third out, the run is cancelled).

FED 7-1-2b seems to be better written, and more clear -- I think this particular ruling is one where FED and OBR agree.

[/QUOTE]
Yes, the improper batter advanced to first. But, was R3's advance to home *because* BR advanced to first? Or was it just *coincidental* to BR's advance to first (R3 advanced *because* of the wild pitch, not because B1 became BR). That's the controversy.

I think the NOTE at the end of 6.07(b) makes it clear -- if the advance is *during* the (illegal) at bat, it stands. In the play presented, the advance was after the at-bat (B1 had become BR -- see 6.04), so the runner must return (or, since this was the third out, the run is cancelled).

FED 7-1-2b seems to be better written, and more clear -- I think this particular ruling is one where FED and OBR agree.

[/B][/QUOTE]

Bob, had there been only 1 out, the run would score, regardless of when the at bat ended. The runner's advance had nothing to do with the improper batter's actions (hit, walk, HBP, etc.) The controversy is which rule to apply -- no run since BR doesn't reach first, or score the run because the advances of this type in BOO situations are allowed.

So then what's the ruling, JEAP? What would you do and why? That's the $64,000 question.

I'm confused how anyone can say the advance was not due to the actions of the incorrect batter. Even though the original post said "wild pitch" it wasn't because a strike cannot be a wild pitch. So, we have a simple uncaught third strike situation with the advance to first being no different than if the batter walked, got a hit, or reached on an error. OBR 6.07
The batter became a B/R the instant he struck out OLB 6.09 and, if that was before the runner on third crossed the plate, B/R's out at first for BOO was the third out, he never officially reached first, so no runs can score.
If I'm off on this, please tell me where and cite the rule for me.
Thanks.

Wow. So much incorrect there. I'll only state the obvious one. "There can be no wild pitch on a strike." Complete and utter nonsense, no offense. There can be, and often is. Strike two bounces past the catcher, and R1 goes to 2nd. Wild pitch. Or a swinging strike three bounces past the catcher - K/WP allowing batter to reach.

Throw me in the camp that scores this run. Here's my logic.

Move the runner from 3rd to 2nd, and change the number of outs to 1. Same rules are in play, by the way, but this is to clarify.

Sitch 1 - Improper batter singles, R2 moves to 3rd or scores. Defense appeals - proper batter is out, AND YOU MOVE THE RUNNER BACK TO SECOND. So if the single scored a run, you're erasing the run on the appeal of BOO.

Sitch 2 - Improper batter strikes out, ball gets away, R2 moves to 3rd, batter reaches 1st. Defense appeals. Batter is out, and you do NOT move the runner back to second. Why? Because the advance was not CAUSED by batter reaching first - it was caused by the passed ball. There is NO difference between the logic of this situation and the logic of the initial post. The run did NOT score BECAUSE of the actions of the improper batter - it scored because of the wild pitch.

Yes, this is true. However this thread's big deal is whether or not to score the run because of the BOO being the third out on the batter, hence no runs can score if the BR is put out before reaching first.