Missed first base and then tagged

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by CoachJM

tcarilli,

So, if an R1 takes off on the pitch, and the batter hits a fly ball to the F9, who catches it and throws to the F3, who tags the base prior to the R1 retouching, I assume you would rule "SAFE!" ??? (BTW, neither the F3 nor the F9 said anything.)

JM

Not the same. Everyone in the park knows it's an appeal on the fly ball - it meets the An appeal should be clearly intended as an appeal, either by a verbal request by the player or an act that unmistakably indicates an appeal to the umpire.

However, merely tagging a runner who has legally overrun first base is NOT an unmistakable act.

[UmpJM]

Rich,

Whether an "unmistakeable appeal" or not, I believe it is most certainly an out. I offer the following from J/R in support:

J/R, Chapter 9 - Appeals; Subsection C: Missed Base Appeals:

2. A missed base appeal of first (overrun) or home occurs when [7.08k]

a. action is relaxed and the alledgedly missed base or the suspect runner is tagged [7.10d], or

b. action is unrelaxed and the suspect runner is tagged off base.

So, as I said before, if the BR who missed 1B is tagged while off his base, he is out. Got anything that says different?

JM

[LMan]

There is no reason for a fielder to tag a runner returning to 1B after running through the bag, unless he feinted to 2B. If the fielder deliberately tags him as he returns to 1B, I have an out. No way Im passing up the out here by saying in effect, "I thought you were just kidding, I didnt know that was an appeal."

[kylejt]

First, the call is safe.

It's most definitely an appeal play, and it better be very clear why you're tagging him. A "he missed the base, TAG HIM!" from anyone on, or off the field would suffice for intent. But there got to be an unmistakable appeal on this play. Otherwise he might be tagging him because he:

a. turned to the left
b. went to the left of the foul line.
c. the first baseman just aways does this.
d. it's Tuesday.
e. etc.

[UmpJM]

kylejt,

As described, J/R says he's out. You seem to suggest otherwise. You got anything that says different?

JM

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by CoachJM

kylejt,

As described, J/R says he's out. You seem to suggest otherwise. You got anything that says different?

JM

As you can see from the varied responses, opinions still differ.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Perhaps it is not covered in OBR, but it is covered in FED, and that is the rule set being used, so why not just go by the rule here? Why are we dragging OBR interpretations into the mix? I listed the FED rule interpretation that dealt with the situation, and the rule itself uses a missed base as an example.

Sure, if this F3 runs after every runner that crosses 1st base and tags them every single time, then this would not be an unmistakable appeal. But really, who does this? It sure wasn't mentioned in the original post, and would be something that would be important to know, right?

So, let's be realistic and assume F3 only ran after and tagged this one runner because he saw the same missed base that the umpire did. The poster has stated that right away, F3 applied a tag. This indicates that it wasn't any kind of non-chalant tag as Pete Booth has suggested. Now it becomes an unmistakable appeal, and no verbal is required.

[SanDiegoSteve]

kylejt,

I disagree. In this play, the first baseman tried a swipe tag and missed the runner. He then immediately chased the runner down and applied a tag after passing the base. This to me is pretty darn unmistakable that F3 is appealing the missed base. I've got an out.

Rule 8-2-(1 thru 5) NOTE: When a play by its very nature is imminent and is obvious to the offense, defense and umpire(s), no verbal appeal is necessary, e.g. runer attempting to retouch a base that was missed, or a failure to tag up and a throw has been made to that base or plate while a play is in progress.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Remember, it's summer coaches league (FED) ball we're talking here.

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

We did this dance a few months ago and although I hated the mechanic cited, I realize why they want it called that way. In OBR (yes, I know this was Fed), according to the J/R and Evans manuals, they want you to signal safe and wait for the proper appeal to be made. A few members even wrote that it is not an unmistakable appeal, since it is a continuation of the normal playing action. I guess it comes down to whether the first baseman immediately realized that the player missed the base or was informed by another or the bench.

In Fed, I call the out since the onus is on the player for completing the required playing action in order to be considered safe. He did not, is lazy, stupid or unlucky and OUT!

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

In this play, the first baseman tried a swipe tag and missed the runner. He then immediately chased the runner down and applied a tag after passing the base. This to me is pretty darn unmistakable that F3 is appealing the missed base. I've got an out.

I think in most cases on the field, kyle and everyone else here would agree with you. The key, as stated several times here, is an "unmistakeable appeal". We, as umpires, are allowed to think. J/R is a great guideline, but cannot cover EVERYthing.

Take in ALL of your information. I'd err on the side of an out here too - but it is NOT automatic, as you seem to be implying. There are numerous reasons F3 could be tagging the runner (some mentioned above). If F3 is doing this on every play, then this is not an unmistakeable appeal. If F3 had previously tried to get a cheap out after a runner turned left, and the runner in this sitch turned left as well, again - not an unmistakeable appeal. The appeal doesn't have to be verbal - but if not verbal is DOES have to be unmistakeable.

Often, on a play like this, if you don't rule an out immediately, F3 will look at you and say something like, "But he missed the base". If this is said quickly enough that, your natural pause in timing on other plays comes in handy here, as you can still call the out. If F3 doesn't say this, it's likely he was NOT making an appeal, and was tagging the runner for some other reason.

[ctblu40]

I'm more likely than not to call the runner out here. If for no other reason, the appearence of an out.

BTW- I attended a The 20th Annual Southern Umpires Camp a few years ago, and in attendance were about 12-15 MLB umpires (Davis, Nauert, Crawford, Emmel, Hudson, to name a few).

This same situation was raised, and there was quite a debate amoung the MLB guys as to the correct ruling. It was nice to see that they struggle with this kind of thing as well.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by CoachJM

Rich,

Whether an "unmistakeable appeal" or not, I believe it is most certainly an out. I offer the following from J/R in support:

J/R, Chapter 9 - Appeals; Subsection C: Missed Base Appeals:

Quote:

2. A missed base appeal of first (overrun) or home occurs when [7.08k]

a. action is relaxed and the alledgedly missed base or the suspect runner is tagged [7.10d], or

b. action is unrelaxed and the suspect runner is tagged off base.

So, as I said before, if the BR who missed 1B is tagged while off his base, he is out. Got anything that says different?

JM

The fact that it says "appeal" - several times. It must be appealed. An appeal must be verbal or an unmistakable act.

[UmpJM]

Rich,

I believe that J/R is suggesting that a tag of the BR who has missed 1B and is not in contact during unrelaxed action IS a "properly constituted appeal" - that's what the text I quoted above says. There is no Official Interpretation or Authoritative Opinion that says anything different.

Just as with a runner returning to retouch on a caught fly ball during unrelaxed action, the action of the tag is sufficient to properly constitute the appeal.

JM