OBR BOO nightmare

[PeteBooth]

Originally posted by greymule

My difficulty is in understanding the precise meaning of "because of the improper batter's advance to 1B." Obviously, this covers runners who were forced to advance because the improper batter, for example, received a base on balls. Send those runners back.

But in the play I posted, you could argue it either way (I guess).

You do not "let the defense off the hook" when they make a bad play.

When F1 throws a wild pitch, that had nothing to do with whom was up at bat, therefore, the result of runners advancing stays. Now if B1 hit one out of the park, then all the runners advanced because of the improper batter at bat and if appealed propely, the runners go back to their TOP bases.

In BOO, the question that you ask is:

1. Did runners advance because of B1's action meaning the ball being hit. or

2. Did the runners advance due to "another factor" namely a wild pitch.

Here's the difference.

R2, Improper at bat, grounds to F4 who throws to F3 for the out but R2 advances to third. Defense properly appeals.

Result: B1 is out and R2 returned to second because R2 advanced to third as part of the improper's batter hitting the ball.

Same as above except R2 was stealing on the pitch. R2 is allowed to remain at third.

Do not complicate life on BOO. If the improper batter "did something" that caused the advance then return the runners. If the batter has nothing to do with the advance, runners stay where they are.

Pete Booth

[mbyron]

Same as above except R2 was stealing on the pitch. R2 is allowed to remain at third.

Pete: in the sitch you mention, shouldn't we send that runner back? You would not give the offense the benefit of the doubt by assuming the runner would have succeeded in stealing the base.

In a different case: R2 steals 3B on the first pitch and then on the next pitch scores when the BOO batter grounds out to F4, we place the runner on 3B, not 2B. He stole on the pitcher, not from the batter's actions.

[Edited by mbyron on Mar 6th, 2006 at 12:58 PM]

[PeteBooth]

Originally posted by mbyron


Pete: in the sitch you mention, shouldn't we send that runner back? You would not give the offense the benefit of the doubt by assuming the runner would have succeeded in stealing the base.

Not sure what you mean. here's the note from OBR 6.07

NOTE: If a runner advances, while the improper batter is at bat, on a stolen base , balk, wild pitch or passed ball, such advance is legal.

Perhaps I wasn't clear in my example; I was talking about a stolen base, not a Hit / Run where R2 takes off and B1 makes contact which is a different scenario.

Pete Booth

[mcrowder]

Pete, that is "while the improper batter is at bat", not after the improper batter hits the ball.

I'd be putting the runner back unless the runner had made it all the way to the next base before the ball was hit (not a very likely occurence). Like it was said above, there's no reason to assume the steal would be successful had the ball not been hit. You're giving the offense an advantage during their transgression in that the improper batter prevented the defense from attempting to make an out.

[greymule]

I would have to agree that if the batter hits the ball, runners return TOP whether they were in motion or not. But if R2 is stealing on ball 4 and makes it, then he gets to keep the base he stole.

I believe also that it can be correctly inferred from the J/R case play that if the improper batter takes ball 4 and then draws a play that allows a runner to advance, such advance would be nullified on appeal. But if ball 4 was wild and the advance would have occurred anyway, it stands.

[mcrowder]

Originally posted by greymule
I would have to agree that if the batter hits the ball, runners return TOP whether they were in motion or not. But if R2 is stealing on ball 4 and makes it, then he gets to keep the base he stole.

I believe also that it can be correctly inferred from the J/R case play that if the improper batter takes ball 4 and then draws a play that allows a runner to advance, such advance would be nullified on appeal. But if ball 4 was wild and the advance would have occurred anyway, it stands.

I agree.

The grey area occurs when R1 is stealing and it ends up being ball 4... but in that case (assuming F2 caught the ball), I would also send R1 back, as the act by the improper batter of receiving ball 4 caused F2 to make no play - when they might have otherwise made a play.

[greymule]

With 1 runner: Ball 4 would not prevent a play on a steal of 3B. Leave the runner at 3B after the appeal. But ball 4 would prevent a play at 2B and is clearly covered in the book. In that case, send the runner back to 1B, running on the pitch or not.

[mcrowder]

Well, then it's not grey for you or me... but it's been grey for some partners I've worked with!