Mechanics Question

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by PWL

Under FED rules he would merely have to go over and touch the base by accident and the runner would be out if the play were part of continuing action. He can also appeal verbally with the ball by stepping on the base. He can also tag the runner off the base.

I thought FED removed the "accidental appeal / force"?

BTW-I saw a college umpire working the Texas-Nebraska game Saturday who gave no call on a no foot on the base and a runner who missed the base. He gave the safe signal when the runner returned to first.

I saw that too. I'm hoping Dave Yeast will post it with an explanation of whether that was the proper mechanic, or whther the Evans mechanic is the proper one.

[UmpJM]

bob j.,

I believe the current proper FED ruling is that "accidental appeals" are NOT supported, EXCEPT on a live ball, continuous action accidental appeal of a missed "forced to" base - then the accidental appeal IS supported.

I think. Sometimes FED rulings make my head hurt.

JM

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by CoachJM

bob j.,

I believe the current proper FED ruling is that "accidental appeals" are NOT supported, EXCEPT on a live ball, continuous action accidental appeal of a missed "forced to" base - then the accidental appeal IS supported.

I think. Sometimes FED rulings make my head hurt.

JM

JM, I believe you are correct. Case Book play 8-2-3 supports your interpretation. For some reason, the FED considers the play at first base a "force" play, while OBR does not.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

JM, I believe you are correct. Case Book play 8-2-3 supports your interpretation. For some reason, the FED considers the play at first base a "force" play, while OBR does not.

But, 8.4.2A and 8.4.2B do NOT allow the "accidental force." Plus, I think the wording in 8.2.3B is inconsistent with the play. I think 8.2.3B is "wrong".

(Finally -- Steve -- please follow the FED standard and use "dots" for cases; "dashes" for rules.)

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

(Finally -- Steve -- please follow the FED standard and use "dots" for cases; "dashes" for rules.)

Yes, by all means, I must be more careful to use the FED standard!

[Rich]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Yes, by all means, I must be more careful to use the FED standard!

No, instead we should be left guessing as to which you mean.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

No, instead we should be left guessing as to which you mean.

Oh, so my typing the words "Case Book" wasn't clear enough? I have to use dots instead of dashes? Nobody ever hipped me to that, dude. Are we that feeble that plain English doesn't do the trick?