Do you count the run?

[UMP25]

OK, now that my evil attempt to sow discord, discontent, and division has been successful (don't underestimate the Power of the Dark Side), here is THE official ruling on this play:

No run.

Pursuant to OBR 4.09(a)(1) and NCAA 5-6-c(1).

Many thanks to my friend Rick Roder for confirming this before I stated it here. Now that I've got half my own association swearing revenge on me for this one, I think it's time to wrap up this specific one.

I KNEW there was a reason I rubbed the nose of my life-size Darth Vader everytime I left in the morning.

[DG]

Originally Posted by UMP25

OK, now that my evil attempt to sow discord, discontent, and division has been successful (don't underestimate the Power of the Dark Side), here is THE official ruling on this play:

No run.

Pursuant to OBR 4.09(a)(1) and NCAA 5-6-c(1).

Many thanks to my friend Rick Roder for confirming this before I stated it here. Now that I've got half my own association swearing revenge on me for this one, I think it's time to wrap up this specific one.

I KNEW there was a reason I rubbed the nose of my life-size Darth Vader everytime I left in the morning.

Your friend Rick contradicts himself, "A runner who advanced for some other reason (wild pickoff throw overthrow, wild pitch, balk) is allowed his advance. 6.07b2".

Your reference to 4.09(a)(1) and 5-6-c(1) would require the coach to come running out of the dugout to appeal the BOO while the catcher is retrieving the pass ball and before the B-R reaches 1B.

[UMP25]

No it wouldn't. BTW, the Rick to whom I refer is Rick Roder of the Jaksa/Roder manual. You're making the error of thinking of this as some sort of time play. When it comes down to it, it is an advance that occurred on a play involving a batter not reaching first base for the final out.

No run.

[greymule]

For a related thread, see "OBR BOO Nightmare" from March 6. It's on page 12 at the moment, so you may have to adjust your settings to go back that far. Several different variations were discussed.

[UMP25]

If it's on page 12 right now, I'll just let sleeping dogs lie.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by UMP25

OK, now that my evil attempt to sow discord, discontent, and division has been successful (don't underestimate the Power of the Dark Side), here is THE official ruling on this play:

No run.

Pursuant to OBR 4.09(a)(1) and NCAA 5-6-c(1).

Many thanks to my friend Rick Roder for confirming this before I stated it here. Now that I've got half my own association swearing revenge on me for this one, I think it's time to wrap up this specific one.

I KNEW there was a reason I rubbed the nose of my life-size Darth Vader everytime I left in the morning.

So, what's the ruling when the BOO is NOT the third out? Does R3 socre, or is R3 returned? (or, is that what was covered on page 12?)

[jxt127]

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.

[DG]

Originally Posted by jxt127

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.

How funny. Under what condition would you judge that the runner would not have scored on a passed ball, had the improper batter not walked on ball 4?

[UmpJM]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

So, what's the ruling when the BOO is NOT the third out? Does R3 socre, or is R3 returned? (or, is that what was covered on page 12?)

Bob J.,

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::

Originally Posted by J/R

(3)
Any runner who became out during the continuous action must return to his base; his out is nullified.

So if the offense does something illegal and we are going to disallow any outs obtained by the defense during the continuous action of the play on which the improper batter completed his at bat, I don't see why anyone who understands the rules of baseball would think we would allow the offense to gain an advantage by benefitting from any advances on the play.

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

[SAump]

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?

[NIump50]

Originally Posted by CoachJM

Bob J.,

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::



So if the offense does something illegal and we are going to disallow any outs obtained by the defense during the continuous action of the play on which the improper batter completed his at bat, I don't see why anyone who understands the rules of baseball would think we would allow the offense to gain an advantage by benefitting from any advances on the play.

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

I don't believe this is continuous action. The walk to the illegal batter and advance on a WP are two separate actions. The out would not be nullified and proper batter is out on appeal

[UmpJM]

Originally Posted by NIump50

I don't believe this is continuous action. The walk to the illegal batter and advance on a WP are two separate actions.

NIump50,

Despite your "belief", this IS, in fact, "continuous action".

From J/R (to my knowledge, the only authoritative source which defines the concept):

Continuous action: an uninterrupted progression of play starting with the pitchand ending typically when the runners have ceased trying to advance, and the defense has relaxed and is returning (or has returned) the ball to the pitcher. ...

Originally Posted by NIump50

The out would not be nullified and proper batter is out on appeal

Despite your deep understanding of the rules and their proper application evident in this and other posts (res ipsa loquitor), I am more inclined to subscribe to the opposite opinion espoused by J/R:

(3) Any runner who became out during the continuous action must return to his base; his out is nullified. ...

Though I would certainly concur that the "...proper batter is out on appeal."

JM

[NIump50]

Originally Posted by CoachJM

NIump50,

Despite your "belief", this IS, in fact, "continuous action".

From J/R (to my knowledge, the only authoritative source which defines the concept):





Despite your deep understanding of the rules and their proper application evident in this and other posts (res ipsa loquitor), I am more inclined to subscribe to the opposite opinion espoused by J/R:



Though I would certainly concur that the "...proper batter is out on appeal."

JM

Perhaps I mispoke on the 'continuous action' point, but for the purpose of this call they are two distinct and separate actions. R3s attempt to score has nothing to do with BOO. The defense will not be penalized and the out stands.
I see well qualified people on both sides of this issue and IMHO J/R is not conclusive on this sitch.
You have to remember
1. Most rules have been made and evolved over the years to address specific situations and issues, which is why many rules also have many exceptions as well.
2. It would be very difficult to write a rule and have every exception and situation covered from the get go. Which is why J/R comes out with new editions, with new interpretations and new cases on an annual basis.
3. This is why rule 9 was made.
4. This is why umpires need to be more than rule robots and have some common sense.

We can discuss the fine points of this situation and I believe reasonable men can reasonably disagree. If every rule was already perfectly written and perfectly interpreted your precious J/R would be out of business.

For me, in this situation, where I believe there is ambiguity I am going to approach it with my sense of baseball logic.
1. I'm not going to penalize the defense because the offense can't read the lineup card.
2. I take outs wherever I can get them.(It's the real world, deal with it)
3. Whenever in doubt, refer to #2.
OK maybe 2&3 are a tad flippant. But until a definitive interpretation to the contrary is produced I stand by #1.

And may I say, it's a good thing you are a coach and not an umpire.
A rules geek ump that enforces every rule by the letter of the law, more times than not causes more problems than he solves.

I also understand your condescending and know it all attitude as evidenced in your response to my post. You're a coach, I expect nothing less.

[greymule]

Posted by BigUmp56 on the March 6 thread:

From the J/R:

In the bottom of the seventh there are no outs, Adams is at first, and Leo is due to bat. However King steps into the box. A pitch is ball four and goes wild past the catcher. The catcher retrieves the ball and throws to the first baseman for an unsuccessful play on the Batter-Runner (King) who rounded first base. The defense appeals that the offense has batted out of order:

1) The catchers throw was a part of the continuous action, and should not be interpreted as a post-continuous action play and the appeal can be sustained. The proper batter (Leo) is out. King is removed from first base. The umpire must decide whether Adams’ advance was due to King’s award or due to the wildness of the pitch (i.e., would Adams have advanced if the pitch had been ball three?). Adams is allowed to remain at second base with one out and Cooper is the proper batter.

[Underlining is mine.]

[UmpJM]

NIump50,

Curiously enough, I find myself in nearly complete agreement with everything you said in your above post.

The "exception", if I understand you correctly, would be to your assertion that you would let additional outs obtained by the defense on the play stand upon a proper appeal by the offense.

Oddly enough, this would be the correct ruling in a game played under FED rules (Fed 7-1-2b Exception), but an incorrect ruling in a game played under OBR rules (PBUC Section 2.3).

The sarcasm evident in my response to your earlier post was elicited by your failure to provide any support for your assertions in terms of rule or interpretation citations, or even any coherent "train of thought" as to why you might believe those assertions to be correct. And the fact that you "misspoke" in making your initial assertion.

JM