![]() |
If it's on page 12 right now, I'll just let sleeping dogs lie. ;)
|
Quote:
It's all so confusing, can someone PLEASE HELP!!! Oh, the humanity.......:o |
Quote:
Ju should hab trusted Queesdraw when heem toll you da truth!;) Tim. |
Quote:
This is the first response which gave the correct reasoning for not allowing the run to score: Quote:
|
Quote:
|
If the BOO is not the 3rd out you must determine if the run would have scored had the Batter not become a batter-runner.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Let's see.... If you were to have a wild pitch ball four with less than 2 outs and the (unforced) R3 attempts to advance and is put out at the plate and the defense successfully appeals a BOOT what would happen? Let's see, the proper batter would be called out, the R3 would be returned to 3B (and his out nullified), the improper batter would be removed from 1B, and the offense would send another batter to the plate. Reference: J/R, Chapter 9 -- Appeals, I. Batting Out of Order, B. Defense appeals at correct time:: Quote:
Some people seem to think the rule says we only nullify advances that are "directly caused" by "the improper batter's actions". The rule certainly doesn't say that, and it doesn't mean that either. I would say that the advance is properly nullified and the R3 is returned. Wouldn't you agree? JM |
Hey Defense, Head on Straight?
If the defense appeals BOO with less than 2 out and the runner is returned to 3B, who was put out at the plate, would I ask the coach if he was sure of what he was doing? What if the coach realizes that he is better often allowing the play to stand. Can DC change his mind during the turmoil?
|
If an umpire falls in the forest, does he get bear crap on his ball bags?
http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/10/10_14_2.gif |
Quote:
|
From the March 6 thread:
Abel on 3B, Baker on 2B, Charles on 1B, no outs. Daniels is supposed to bat, but Edwards bats instead. Ball 4 to Edwards is in the dirt, kicks off F2's shinguard, and bounces into the dugout. Edwards advances to 1B on ball 4, and the runners move up a base. The appeal by the defense that Daniels failed to bat in the proper order is upheld. OK. Daniels is out, Edwards is taken off 1B to bat again. But are the advances by Abel, Baker, and Charles legal? In other words, do we interpret those advances as being a result of Edwards' advance to 1B, or are they a result of the award for the pitch going into DBT? After some discussion, it was generally agreed on this thread that the advances were allowed and therefore the run did score. I think it was also agreed that even if the ball had stayed in play, if the umpire judged that the advances would have occurred with the wild pitch, they would stand. Several similar situations were also assessed. |
Not to pick open an old scab, but I disagree. The INSTANT ball four crosses the plate, the runners are awarded a base, and this award is specifically due to the actions of the improper batter. The fact that the pitch subsequently went out of play did not add to anyone's award or change the situation at all. If it was just a wild pitch that stayed in the park, I'm even more convinced to put the runners back, as the defense would have FAR less urgency in trying to retrieve the ball, considering that they THINK they don't have a play at the plate on R1 due to the BB.
I've said it before, and I'll maintain that the only sitch where runners that advance simultaneously with a BOO batter's base on balls is a sitch where those runners advances were with liability to be put out (i.e. a runner advancing home or to third that was NOT forced by the BOO's BB). In any other sitch, the defense's reaction to those runners was tainted (read: affected) by the fact that BOO batter drew the walk. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Despite your "belief", this IS, in fact, "continuous action". From J/R (to my knowledge, the only authoritative source which defines the concept): Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
JM |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:47pm. |