Here's a play that happened last night during my son's game(league championship, which his team won 11-2, but I digress):

R1,R2, no outs. B1 hits a Texas-leaguer to shallow LF. F6 races back, stretches out, and gloves the ball but drops it as he falls to the ground. U3 calls "safe, no catch," but not very demonstrative. No IFF called because of the extraordinary effort to even get to the ball.

Runners hold thinking it was caught. (F6 is shielding the runner's view of the ball on the ground.) BR actually trots back to his dug-out(1B side) thinking he's out. F6 gets up, throws to F5, starting the triple play.

Here's my question:

If the BR entered the dug-out before the above action, being called out for abandonment, does that remove the forces at 2B and 3B? I believe it does.

However, here's the wrinkle in this sitch:

Is the removal of the force-outs considered a timing play? I.E., if the BR reaches his dug-out after R2 is forced at 3B, but before R1 is forced at 2B, does F4 now have to tag R1?

"Is the removal of the force-outs considered a timing play? I.E., if the BR reaches his dug-out after R2 is forced at 3B, but before R1 is forced at 2B, does F4 now have to tag R1?"

No, the removal of the force out is not considered a timing play. The force on R1 & R2 can not be removed until the BR's out at first base, is recorded.

Now, if there were 2 outs and R1 abandoned their effort to get to second and was delared out for abandonment, then R2's run would score, if it was registered before the umpire declared R1 out. (This would be a timing play)
The defense would then have to appeal for an advantageous 4th out at second, to record the force out, and then the run would not count.

This is an interesting one.

I have always been of the opinion that the rule allowing outs to be recorded for abandonment ONLY applied to runners who have reached first.

<font color=blue>OBR 7.08(a)(2) Any runner is out when, <b>after touching first base</b>, he leaves the baseline, obviously abandoning his effort to touch the next base.</font>

Under that same rule there is the well known APPROVED RULING that covers the special instance when the BR enters the dugout after an uncaught third strike. I suspect the reason they had to have that APPROVED RULING is because the rule, itself, does not specifically cover abandonment issues with regards to a BR who has not reached first.

Unless there is some special interpretation that I'm too lazy to look for at this moment, it's not even clear that a BR is out simply by virtue that he enters the dugout on a fair batted ball before advancing to and touching first.

For many years, a runner who "scored", yet missed the plate, was allowed to enter the dugout, realize his mistake, emerge from the dugout and retouch the plate. Any subsequent appeal that he missed the plate would be denied.

That is no longer the case, however. Runners who "score", yet miss the plate, can no longer correct their baserunning error once they've entered the dugout.

It only seems logical that a BR who enters the dugout as in your example should be out; but, unless there is some interpretation saying so (and there probably is), I don't think it's easy to support from the black & white of the rulebook.

Assuming that a batter *can* enter the dugout on his way to first, that would mean the forces *were* in tact.

If you think about it - it seems more fair (especially to the defense) that a BR *not* be able to remove force plays by entering his dugout. Such a BR could be put out at the leisure of the defense once other outs (force outs!) have been recorded - as in your example.

I'm not sure of the ruling, quite frankly, and I'd have to do a little research - that's why it's interesting.

I found this <A HREF="http://www.rulesofbaseball.com/portfolio/abandon.html">interesting article</A> by Rick Roder, but it still doesn't address a BR who has neither struck out nor reached first when he enters the dugout.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[Edited by David Emerling on Nov 1st, 2005 at 10:44 AM]

Emerling:
"If you think about it - it seems more fair (especially to the defense) that a BR *not* be able to remove force plays by entering his dugout."

I agree 100%. Consider this sitch (forgive the TWP aspects):

Bases loaded, no outs. B1 hits a slow roller to F6, who bobbles the ball, but manages to fire a bullet to F2 for the force out at home. All well and good, but BR sees that R3 is dead-meat, so he takes off for his dugout, reaching it before F6 makes his throw. If BR is called out for abandonment, then the force out at home becomes a tag play, which given the circumstances, is substantially more difficult to accomplish.

If we allow the forces to be removed by calling BR out for abandonment, then an unfair advantage is gained by unorthodox play by the offense.

This may be the best 3rd world play I have ever heard, a batter who is actually thinking about anything other than running to 1B after hitting a ball to SS.

The answer is easy guys...don't call the abandonment.

You're going to take a triple play off the board because a batter had a brain fart and didn't run? If they fail to get one of the advancing runners, then at the end of playing action call the abandonment. The offensive player's actions caused this play to break down, he loses all benefit of the doubt. Find a way to penalize the offense in this one, not the defense.

It's not our job to "find a way to penalize" anyone. I'm kind of offended by the remark, in fact.

The question is --- what do the rules support?

Let's make this a little less 3rd world. R1, R2, 1 out. High pop up to medium CF. Batter, in disgust, heads straight for the dugout and enters it before CF makes a play. CF fails to make the catch, but recovers in time to fire to 2nd base just ahead of R1, and then F4 fires to first base. What do you have?

8-4-3 DP. Abandonment, by rule, only applies to runners who have reached first base and entering the dugout is not directly relevant on a batted ball, only on a third strike not caught.

I have no problem with the concept of penalizing the offending team, but this isn't one of those places.

PWL, FWIW...
 

My son's fall ball league this year experimented by having no coaches. The kids (10-12 yrs) ran the whole show: line-ups, positions, pitching changes, everything. They had a blast, and it was fun to watch them learn that managing a game involves paying more attention to what's going on than what they were used to.

Re: PWL, FWIW...
 

Now if we could just get them to do this at every level....;)

Roder has also had this to say, in the original Jaksa/Roder Manual:

<font color=blue>By rule, a batter-runner cannot be out for abandoning before touching (or passing) first base. However, a batter-runner who aborts an advance toward first base before touching (or passing) such base and reaches his bench, dugout, dugout steps, or defensive position is out because of his desertion. Desertion typically occurs when a third strike is not caught and the defense neglects tagging the B-R or first base. Although improbable, desertion can also occur an award (e.g., after ball four after the B-R goes directly to his dugout in favor of a pinch-runner) or a batted ball.</font>

Thanks for doing the research, Dave.

I knew if I claimed I was too lazy to look it up (i.e. lack of time) that somebody would chime in. I suspected there was an official interpretation or authoritative opinion out there on this issue.

Like I said, it seems <b>logical</b> that such a runner would be out.

As "improbable" as Roder thought it might be in any other case other than an uncaught 3rd strike, the original example in this thread has a pretty good instance how it *could* (<i>and did!</i>) happen under other circumstances ... and for innocent reasons.

To answer the the original question, it all comes down to WHEN the umpire calls a BR for this "desertion". (I <i>like</i> that word because, when discussing a unique play like this, you have to use something other than "abandonment".)

Is he out the very instant he steps into the dugout?

Or, when the play is over (after force outs have been registered), and the umpire discovers that the BR has deserted, he <i>then</i> calls the BR, thereby not requiring the defense to take any action to register the out?

Although Roder's opinion specifically addresses the issue as to whether a deserting BR should be called out, it doesn't directly address the <i>timing</i>, which is critical in answering the original post.

Can the desertion on the part of the BR cause subsequent "force" outs to evaporate?

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

There will be those who say that "desertion" should be called AFTER the effects of the play are completed. In other words, the forces stay in effect even after BR has entered the dugout.

My question to those people would be, then... say BR enters the dugout on the play I described, and then upon seeing CF drop the ball, proceeds to first base. If you're keeping the forces in play, surely you must rule BR safe... but if you feel inclined to disallow BR's return to the field, then you must have noticed him leave PRIOR to the forceplays being played on, and can NOT allow the force.

An interesting conundrum, no doubt.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by PWL
I think people are reading a little too much into this. There is a live ball in play. As BU, I would be watching the ball and see where it is going first. I am not aware of any rule that says a player has to run to first to begin with.

Just record the out at 3B and 2B. The defense realizing no one is on 1B should just throw the ball over and record the out. I understand the issue is here is timing. However, this would be the last call I would make in the sequence since the ball is in play. If so, I don't think the force would be off until (A) the ball is thrown to 1B behind an advancing runner and actually touched with the ball in possession (B) the runner is tagged before reaching the base.

I would haggle with the rule part of it later. [/QUOTE



[Edited by BigUmp56 on Nov 3rd, 2005 at 03:28 PM]

PWL - when do you call a batter-runner out who fails to run on a D3K?

When he enters the dugout or takes his position in the field. Same thing applies to this batter-runner. (Desertion is not the same as abandonment).

If the force is not removed, then you aren't calling him out. (Conversely, if you're saying he's out when he enters the dugout, then by definition you've removed the force ... and if you can't buy that, what would you say if for some reason the runners returned to 1B and 2B after seeing you call the batter out - if the batter is out, there is no reason they can't return... thus no reason to call them out on a force play).

PS - the proper ruling on a BB is to get him out of the dugout and send him to first. You only have an out there if he simply refuses to take his awarded base.

I'm not missing your point. I'm trying to get you to think it through, but I'm failing.

Let me ask it this way - what rule in FED tells you to call the batter out for entering the dugout after a base on balls? Quote it if necessary.

And don't confuse Abandonment with Desertion. Abandonment cannot be called on a BR who has not yet reached first base... so by what rule are you calling BR out if he enters the dugout on, say, a dropped pop fly to CF?

Also, I will ask this, in effort to steer...

If you are calling the BR out for stepping into the dugout on a dropped pop fly to CF, why could the runners not return? (And if your answer is that they could... then obviously there's no force). Conversely, if you are keeping the force in play, then how do you justify calling the BR out for entering the dugout (or... would you let BR leave his dugout to go to 1st base after seeing CF drop the ball?) You can't have it both ways.

I think you've hit the nail on the head as far as the dilemma this problem presents for the umpire.

I don't think you can support it (by rule) either way.

Rick Roder has an interesting book that I read a while back entitled "More Than 100 Problems With The Official Baseball Rules". So, quite clearly, not everything is covered in the rules and, worse yet, not everything is necessarily covered by an Official Interpretation. Some things are not even covered very well by an Authoritative Opinion.

This may be one of those awkward cases.

It seems to me that the best way to handle this might be as follows.

The force plays stay intact with total disregard as to WHEN the BR enters the dugout. If the defense continues to make a play on the BR, by touching the bag, then the BR is out in the normal fashion and the umpire doesn't have to be concerned with any of these complications.

If the defense fails to make a play on the BR, and the BR belatedly makes a beeline for the bag, the play should be allowed because, clearly, the defense has had their chance and has failed to make a logical play against the BR. If the BR arrives before the bag is touched - he's safe! The BR has gained no advantage by belatedly going for the bag from the dugout. The defense has simply failed to make a logical play.

If the defense fails to make a play on the BR, and the BR remains in the dugout and all action has ceased - the umpire should NOW interpret this as desertion and the BR is now OUT regardless of any subsequent action. The BR has had ample time to realize his mistake and has failed to take action and is no longer given the opportunity to rectify his mistake.

Again, this is based on nothing more than MY OPINION of what might seem a logical and fair way to handle this but I am hardly anyone who can offer an Authoritative Opinion.

In other words, it's MY opinion ... not an AUTHORITATIVE opinion. :-)

My logic is this: The penalty for desertion can be delayed until all continuous action has ceased and the BR, by his <i>lack</i> of action, has made it clear he has no intention of advancing to 1st. At *that* time he forfeits his opportunity to rectify his mistake.

This way of handling it is somewhat consistent with the delayed nature of calling abandonment. Although the RULE states that the runner has to merely leave the baseline and demonstrate no desire to advance on the bases - if I recall correctly (and I could be wrong), the Authoritative Opinion on abandonment has a somewhat higher standard of what constitutes sufficient abandonment to warrant calling the runner out. In practice, the umpire should require the runner to leave the field of play, or, be a "substantial" distance from his position on the basepaths before declaring him out - as opposed to merely "out of the baseline."

Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong about this Authoritative Opinion. I could be.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Note that in none of my commentary did I actually say what I would do given this exact situation. My solution is the same as David's.

I can't see a rule justification for calling BR out for desertion while a play is continuing, so I would both A) keep the force plays in tact, and B) allow BR to exit the dugout should he realize his mistake. If he's still in the dugout when play ceases, THEN I would call him out.

Are these errors in the FED rules, or are you speaking of the 237 errors that Jim Evans has identified in OBR?

A) From who did the certified answer come from? I'd love a solid answer from someone national.

B) By what rule are you calling the BATTER-RUNNER out for abandoning his effort to advance to first by entering the dugout?

As Usual,
 

PWL is wrong.

If what he says is true a rat would simply tell his players:

"If there is a runner on first and you hit a sure double play ground ball to the infield run into the dugout and we'll wind up with a sacrifice rather than a double play."

A batter runner entering the dugout before reaching first base DOES NOT end the force.

Sheese,

T

Wow. What a @$#%*(&. Where the @%@# did that hostility come from?

1) I was hoping that the "certified answer" you got was actually definitive, since we seriously lack a "definitive" answer here. Apparently, it wasn't. Apparently you got it from your hairdresser's sister's step-cousin who used to be married to a truckdriver that had a manicurist who was a part-time umpire. My mistake. (If it truly was Jim Evans, as you imply but do not state, then I'd like to know which rule HE's using for support, since I can't find it).

2) I'm not trying to have any cake and eat it too. You saw my response (perhaps the fact that it was written in plain English made it beyond your capabilities). There's no rule support to recognize abandonment or desertion by the BR DURING a play. I clearly stated that I would not call a BR out for entering the dugout while play still continued, and would even not rule him out if he were to run back on the field and get to first base. That is consistent within itself - no multiple cakes problem here. Since I'm not calling him out until play ceases, the force remains in effect.

This past Friday night, Jim said he had identified 296 errors in the OBR.

I haven't read the whole thread, but from the original play, I think the answer is pretty routine.

1. The B-R cannot be called out for abandoning his effort to run the bases: He hasn't yet touched first. So Roder calls that "desertion."

2. The B-R cannot be called out for deserting his effort to reach first until he enters the dugout or <i>playing action ends</i>.

Therefore:

The force on R1 and R2 remains in effect.

That is not only common sense, it's a practical way to handle this not unlikely play.

Now, if somebody already posted this "solution," I'm sorry. If somebody has already proved it wrong, tell me which post has the Tony.

Wow. At last year's desert classic the number was 237. But he did say he was still digging.

How many did he acutally identify at the clinic? I'd have to check my notes, but I think he only pointed out about a dozen or so at the Classic.

Field work was 17 hours, so he had only 4 hours on Friday night. Very little on the rules, actually. I think he mentioned four or five.

The key is - he is NOT out the second he enters the dugout. And yes, this does mean he can leave the dugout after entering while play was still continuing if he recognizes his mistake and is not physically aided by anyone in the dugout.

Well, that would work - except it's not correct. MLBUM considers a runner in the dugout to be out. If you have an interpretation source to back up your claim, I'd like it so I can put it in the BRD.

So you're saying that a BR *can* cause force plays to evaporate by entering the dugout?

I was unaware of this MLBUM ruling. Because, a strict reading of OBR does not provide for any "automatic out" when a BR enters the dugout during live action.

Roder has something called "desertion" that causes a BR who goes to the dugout to be out but he does not seem to address the timing of the out. Also, he seems to subscribe to "desertion" an <i>unwillingness</i> to advance to 1st, implying that if a BR ignorantly entered the dugout and suddenly realized he was *not* out, that he *could* emerge from the dugout and advance to 1st. I'm not sure about that, though.

I can accept that the BR is out under any condition (which is what you claim the MLBUM says), however it is the TIMING of this out that is critical in the original play.

Frankly, I don't really know what to do about this situation which is why I'm intently following the thread.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Really? Where do you find that?

Also: this is not a runner, but the batter-runner - a significant difference in many rules.

David - if you accept that BR is out because he entered the dugout, then YOU MUST allow the runners to return to their original bases (ie drop the forceouts), since there is no one FORCING them to advance anymore.

Not allowing BR to exit the dugout and go to first, but keeping the forces in place would be (as I was accused of earlier) having your cake and eating it too.

[Edited by mcrowder on Nov 10th, 2005 at 10:18 AM]

Personally, as the Editor of Officiating.com, I've very sorry you "can't accept" that the batter-runner is out when he enters the dugout. (grin)

I have a suggestion. If you don't get an authoritative source from mcrowder (which you won't), and if this ever happens in your game (which it won't), just call him out and I'll bet TWO dollars to a penny that everybody accepts that as the legitimate outcome of the play.

Too stupid to run to first? Fugget about it.

Carl - do you then allow the runners to return to their original bases (i.e. drop the forceplay)? If not - why not - batter is out and no one is forcing them to advance anymore.

No - you won't get an authoritative source from me. It's my contention that this is not officially ruled on. You claim MLBUM has, but I've not seen that and apparently no one else has (if they had, they would have posted it). Please enlighten us if they have and show us where.

A runner who has scored but missed the plate may not return to touch it. A BATTER-RUNNER whose third strike is not caught in flight is out when he reaches the dugout or steps of his bench. You can find the first in the MLBUM (look for it, it will do you good) and the second in the OBR (ditto my above remark).

I'm interested in only one issue: When is a batter out when he deserts first?

But, if he's out when he enters the dugout, which is the <i> only sensible call</i>, consecutive runners may do whatever turns them on. And they will be out only on a tag while off a base. Any base.

Frankly, I can't believe this is still being discussed by people who are supposed to know something about baseball. Consequently, I'll bow out now and leave the inmates in charge. (grin)

Carl,
 

I A2D. (I think and if I have followed the thread correctly.)

Play Situation:

Score is 4-4 in the bottom of the last inning. Home team has the bases loaded and one out.

Batter hits a perfect double play ball to F6 who shuffles to F4 to retire a legally sliding r1 who is being forced to second. F4 relays the ball to F3 and it appears that the batter is out by, hmmm 90 feet, because upon hitting the ball that batter-runner ran directly into the dugout (we have several dugouts in the PDX area that are less than 20' from home plate).

As the defense runs off the field hooping and hoolering because they stuffed the rally the plate umpire signals that r3 run counts and the game is over.

So the defense did nothing wrong. The turned a perfect double play BUT it appears that some people are saying the force is off when the BR entered the dugout.

I am having trouble buying into the reward to the offense that deliberately made the out.

What am I missing?

T

[Edited by Tim C on Nov 10th, 2005 at 10:57 AM]

I'm not debating anybody on this issue. I'm just trying to understand it and am willing to be convinced either way. I find it very intersting especially since this play *did* happen in the context of something that *could* happen.

Originally, I said that I would allow the BR to emerge from the dugout if he promptly realized his mistake. I said that because I was unaware of any provision in OBR that states that he is automatically out. Now, I discover, that there is apparently something in the MLBUM that states the BR is, in fact, out for entering the dugout.

OK, fine, I can accept that.

But, is he out IMMEDIATELY? That's important because it determines the status of the force plays.

I don't think that aspect has been addressed by any official interpretation or authoritative opinion, has it?

Something just doesn't seem right about the defense having to keep tabs on the timing of the BR entering the dugout in order to determine whether they have tag the other runners or not.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

The satement that Carl makes is documented in the BRD that he puts out every year. He even added a statement where as "MLB doesn't change the rules, only the instructions to the umpires" and that is what causes arguments like this. I don't have a copy of the BRD at work so maybe Carl can post it. I'm suprised that all the readers of the BRD didn't jump on this statement.

Re: Carl,
 

Aren't you missing that the force was in effect at the time of the pitch?

You're saying that the batter-runner can reach the dugout (20 feet) in about 3 seconds.

If so, then I want to be his agent.

The umpire is the dumb schmuck (is that redundant?) here. He just didn't want to go an extra inning.

I hope he can call for assistance leaving the field.

Let's get serious here. You and I know that any umpire who permitted a player to return to the field for playing action after entering the dugout is in deep caca.

I think I would handle it in the identical manner.

I guess, where I was initially wrong, in addition, I would have allowed the BR to emerge from the dugout and attempt to correct his misunderstanding as long as the play was still in progress. I would have only called him out (for desertion) if he <b>remained</b> in the dugout when all playing action has ended. But, like you said, that would probably be rendered moot by the defense throwing him out at 1st. THAT'S the out I would recognize as the final out in the sequence.

Apparently, the correct call is that the BR is out, no matter what, simply by virtue that he entered the dugout. Yet, that interpretation apparently doesn't say that the runner is out IMMEDIATELY in the context of the play we are discussing.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Re: Re: Carl,
 

Carl,

No. The original play (the first one in this thread) is as follows:

<font color=red>
Here's a play that happened last night during my son's game(league championship, which his team won 11-2, but I digress):

R1,R2, no outs. B1 hits a Texas-leaguer to shallow LF. F6 races back, stretches out, and gloves the ball but drops it as he falls to the ground. U3 calls "safe, no catch," but not very demonstrative. No IFF called because of the extraordinary effort to even get to the ball.

Runners hold thinking it was caught. (F6 is shielding the runner's view of the ball on the ground.) BR actually trots back to his dug-out(1B side) thinking he's out. F6 gets up, throws to F5, starting the triple play.

Here's my question:

If the BR entered the dug-out before the above action, being called out for abandonment, does that remove the forces at 2B and 3B? I believe it does.

However, here's the wrinkle in this sitch:

Is the removal of the force-outs considered a timing play? I.E., if the BR reaches his dug-out after R2 is forced at 3B, but before R1 is forced at 2B, does F4 now have to tag R1?</font>

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

I guess I have to take the blame for this. on 10/30/05, one hour and forty two minutes after this original thread was posted, I answered it based upon BRD2005 pg. 256 Section 410 "Runner: Abandons Attempt To Run Bases." the note on page 257 specifically, address deserting vs abanonment.

Mabey I should have referenced this but, not in my wildest dreams did I figure it would have been carried on this long.

Color me amazed!!!!!!

Hopefully,
 

I am not being thickheaded I just am confused:

For a player to run 18 feet in three seconds is pretty easy. Mickey Mantle ran the 90'to first in 3.2 seconds. I am asking a batter to cover approximately 1/4 that distance in basically the same time.

Sooooo,

I took a break and drove over to one of my local PIL (High School Fields) and used a highly accurate measuring system (I place one foot in from of the other, counted the steps and then came back here and measured my shoe):

The dugout is 17'9" from home plate.

Now back to my situation:

By reading this entire thread again,it appears that some of the people posting feel that if the batter-runner ran directly to the dugout that the force out would be eliminated and a tag would have to be made.

1) Have I nterpreted this part of the thread correctly?

2) Did the bases being occupied, as in my original situation, at the time of the pitch make a difference?

3) If it did (see #2) then we appear, at first glance, to have two conflicting views.

Help me, Mr Wizard!!!!

I am lost and confused.

T

First, Carl - you are taking unrelated situations and applying them here. One is a runner who has crossed home plate and entered their dugout. The book doesn't say they are OUT for entering the dugout - it says they cannot reenter the field for the purposes of retracing their path. The other is a BR on a U3K - again, not the same sitch.

If you are having trouble solely with the timing of a BR making it into the dugout in 3 seconds (3 seconds is lot longer than you think), then use the alternate scenario of a popup to CF, with R1 and R2 - runners don't run, but CF doesn't catch the ball. CF fires to 2nd base to get the force on R1, but BR has given up the play and entered the dugout just ahead of the drop, and before the ball is thrown to 2nd base. Under your ruling, F4/F6 would have to tag the runner. I disagree with this wholely.

I state again - show us a rule that says that BR, on a hit ball, is out immediately upon entering the dugout.

Re: Hopefully,
 

Tim,

Oftentimes the discussions amongst umpires are completely academic. Those academic discussions/debates force us to research and address points that are frequently applicable to less academic, and more practical situations. In other words, we glean bits of information from the hypothetical situation and apply them to real situations.

This is why discussing hypothetical plays have value and to dismiss them as Third World Plays that could never happen completely misses the point.

Saying how something doesn't seem possible (or likely) doesn't help with the salient issues very much.

In fact, this thread started with a situation that involved these issues. It really happened!

The batter thought he was out on a flyball so he just gave up and went headed toward the dugout. I've seen that before.

The runners held up, thinking it would it would be caught. I've seen that before.

The ball was dropped in such a way that it was not immediately apparent to the runners. I've seen that before.

The outfielder recovered the ball and attempted to "force out" the runners. I've seen that before.

But the BR is *already* in the dugout which, by the way, would not necessarily take great speed, nothwithstanding your "study" of how long it took you to reach the dugout.

THIS, I've never seen before. But I can certainly see how it could happen.

The questions are ...

1. Is the BR automatically out for entering the dugout?

2. If so, does this out become effective the very instant the BR enters the dugout - thus eliminating all force plays?

3. If not, can the BR *ever* come out of the dugout and proceed to 1st?

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Re: Re: Hopefully,
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by David Emerling
[B]1) Yes
2) Yes, but it does not eliminate force plays.
3) See answer to 1)

Of course these answers have already been provided...

[Edited by DG on Nov 11th, 2005 at 11:42 PM]

A few years back, I umpired several games for the same team in a 40+ adult league, and every time this one guy would hit a routine grounder to an infielder, he would turn and run to the dugout. Everybody always got a kick out of that!:D

http://media.scout.com/media/image/19/193123.gif

May I?
 

Here's a twist...

My take is we need to judge the intent of the batter-runner. There is no legal way for the offense to CONCEDE an out without being played upon. In T's play the BR is clearly cheating the defense out of a game ending double play. Desertion of efforts to advance cannot be intentional. The concepts of abandonment and desertion are not strategies for the offense. They are methods to save umpires the time (potentially infinite) of waiting for a runner who thought he was out to try an advance. In T's "oranges" play, the DP stands, game over.

In the original "apples" play, it would be hard for me to picture the real possibility of a BR who clearly thought he was out (depressed, mopey) making it to the dugout before the triple play could have been completed. However, I do believe that the BR could be called out, and in this particular case, with the BR truly believing he was out and not trying to cheat the defense (pant, pant), you could make a case for calling him out the moment he entered his bench area and thusly removing the force plays on the runners on base. Still, in continuous action with multiple runners and the play as you describe it, no one will be watching the BR and the timing of his entering the dugout would be next to impossible to ascertain. Therefore the practical ruling would be to call the play as it apparently was...triple play stands.

Babble, babble, babble.

D-Man

Re: May I?
 

But in the original play that started this thread, I think it WOULD be very easy to ascertain the timing and it appeared that there was no question that the BR *did*, in fact, enter the dugout before the force outs were recorded.

Remember, the BR hit a flyball into the outfield that was dropped. The BR, thinking it was caught, went to the dugout while the outfielder chased down the ball to throw it back into the infield to begin the force outs.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

A sloppy solution
 

I've enjoyed following this thread and the academic arguments that it provided. Perhaps a sloppy solution would work for this apparent whole in the rules/interps.

Can we all agree that defense shouldn't have the responsibility for a) keeping tabs on when BR entered the dugout and b) having faith that the umpires would know when he did, made the out signal immediately, and understood the significance of the call (force play removal).

This is the perfect opportunity to just "make the expected call" and not remove the force play.

If OC argued that the force was removed (he's either a very sharp coach or a cheater), then I would say, This is the right call coach. (and perhaps a little white lie if need be) I don't have him entering the d/u until after the force plays were made. Truth is coach, I'm not sure when he entered the d/u, but I'm not going to reward the offense for not running out a batted ball when I'm not sure of the timing. If he says that I blew that call. I'd admit that he may be right, but the force play stands. It's sloppy, but given the whole in the rule, it should be the expected call.

I don't think that I'd be in dooky too deep with my supervisor for possible missing the timing of BR entering the d/u but making the expected (IMO, right) call.

My question is, in a two man crew, who is actually watching the BR enter the dugout on the double-play ball? The plate guy has to watch for the interference at second, and the base guy is following the flight of the ball.
Pretty easy for me to bang the double play here.

JJ

A very practical comment but not one that ultimately answers the essence of the original question; Does the BR entering the dugout, IN FACT, remove force plays the moment he enters the dugout, notwithstanding whether the umpire notices it or not?

That's the whole issue!

And, if you read the very first post in this thread, it would very difficult for the umpire to claim he didn't know the timing.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

This has been a very insightfull thread! IMO- this is the type of discussion that makes these forums so educational.

As it appears there is no definitive source that gives more clarity on this issue, I will tell you what I think I will now do if this ever happens to me, based on the responses you've all given.

1) Once a batter steps into the dugout, I have an out. I'll buy in to the Roder interpretation that the batter can be called out for desertion on a batted ball before touching first base.

2) Although I have the batter out, I'm holding off making that call until all continuing action has relaxed, keeping the force intact.

3) If challenged, I'd just tell the offensive manager that I didn't see exactly when his batter entered the dugout, and in my judgement, it was after the DP was recorded.


Tim.

I think this is probably a very practical, if not totally correct, way of handling the situation.

However, I think you can accomplish the same thing without having to resort to your Step #3. Why have, as part of your solution, a confession of your failing to discern something that an inquiring coach finds critical?

Since there is really nothing the coach can use as a reference to challenge your ruling, you might as well characterize your way of handling it as "standard."

I would change your Step #3 to ...

3) If challenged, I'd just tell the offensive manager that the "out" for his batter's desertion is recorded after all continuous action has ended. The defense should not be burdened with sorting out the complex ramifications of the batter's desertion.

This way you don't have to admit that you failed to observe something and the manager will certainly not be able to challenge the "accuracy" of your ruling since he will have no ready reference to challenge you ... not even a rulebook!

Hell, we're all umpires and even WE toiled with the ruling. The manager will certainly not fair any better. In fact, he'll probably be impressed - although not pleased.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[Edited by David Emerling on Nov 13th, 2005 at 11:12 AM]

Neat vs Sloppy
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by David Emerling
3) If challenged, I'd just tell the offensive manager that the "out" for his batter's desertion is recorded after all continuous action has ended. The defense should not be burdened with sorting out the complex ramifications of the batter's desertion.

This way you don't have to admit that you failed to observe something and the manager will certainly not be able to challenge the "accuracy" of your ruling since he will have no ready reference to challenge you ... not even a rulebook!

I like this explanation much better than my sloppy one. I'd rather make this argument than immediately calling BR out when entering the dugout and picking up the shi#y end of the stick by removing the force.

Good thread folks.

Forgive me, but WHO CARES if it answers the question? We have 5 pages on a third world play and JJ's answer is practical and realistic.

I'm not seeing it, and neither is my partner. We'd have a DP and that would be the end of it.

And I have to disagree. I find this type of thread to be mental masturbation at best and something that hurts novice umpires more than helps at worst.

Then I'll disagree with YOU!

Although the initial scenario has a Third World Play flavor to it ... the fact remains, IT *DID* HAPPEN!

The value of this thread, if nothing else, has taught "novice umpires" a few things they may have not known before.

1. Abandonment does not apply to runners who have not reached 1st. (I don't think a lot of "novice umpires" understand that. If they followed this thread, they would now know.)

2. There is a thing called "desertion" that applies to a BR. The authoritative opinion on desertion is that the BR is *out* once he enters the dugout. (I don't consider myself a "novice umpire" and I wasn't aware of that authoritative opinion. Now I know. Prior to this thread I would have probably allowed the BR to rectify his mistake if it was done in a timely manner.)

3. Another thing to be learned in this thread by a "novice umpire" is that even the most knowledgeable and experienced umpires sometimes have difficulty reaching a consensus on certain basic issues. So, he (the "novice umpire") shouldn't feel like there is always an easy answer for everything.

4. Finally, it has to be asked; At what level of play would some of these items being discussed ever be an issue; high or low level? Clearly, the answer is LOW level. And what kind of umpires would likely be calling these low level games? ... NOVICE UMPIRES!

Higher level umpires often denigrate these type of discussions either out of naivete or the arrogance that such things could "never happen in one of my games" - so they scoff at the entire discussion - as Rich is.

And then another Doug Eddings is born.

I truly believe that valuable things can often be gleaned from seemingly unlikely and Third World Plays.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Got to agree with you, Rich. If ANY umpire blows this call once in twenty years, and I don't know how that is possible because there is NO correct answer. Then it will definitely be another twenty years before they see again!!!!!!

Probably trying to convince a majority of the "green house effect" will be much easier, and definitely more practical.

What's new pussycat?
 

Okay then, you guys come up with something more relevant to discuss. If this subject sucks so bad, give us something new to talk about. I can't think of anything new under the sun myself. I've heard just about every sea story known to umpiring, but I'm willing to hear one more...

http://media.theinsiders.com/Media/O...31_elefant.GIF

Re: What's new pussycat?
 

Check out the thrown bat scenario.

I can name that song in four pages.

Actually, it is a teaser for my lets sit in the chair and watch tv, brain cells.

Then again, its a nice day here in the NE. 18 Holes will do me good.

Catch ya later.

PS: Cute Elephant