Missed first base and then tagged

[PeteBooth]

Originally Posted by GrizzlyUmp14

Varsity summer baseball - not the best game I've ever seen. There is a ground ball to the first baseman, which he bobbles. He eventually gets the ball and attempts to tag the runner, but misses him. The runner does not touch first base, but instead runs over it. The fielder then tags the runner. Is he out or not? Some other umpires said this would have to be an appeal play for missing a bag because once the runner "passes" a base, he has acquired that base. If that is the case, does tagging a runner count as an appeal or does the fielder have to verbally appeal the missed base?

The problem with questions such as these is that in OBR it is not SPECIFICALLY covered, hence you will get all kinds of responses. FED covers it.

The general guidline from the authorities in determining whether an umpire will honor an appeal depends upon the type of "action" involved.

Generally speaking if action is "unrelaxed" no appeal will be honored. During unrelaxed action the runner is scrambling back etc.

if action is "relaxed" then the defense needs to appeal.

Now to the thread. It's a had to be there scenario.

If B1 over-ran first and then immediately tried to scramble back and touch the bag and was subsequently tagged I would record the out because of un-relaxed action.

Same as above except B1 was about 10 ft. or so past first not in a hurry to return and on his way back to the bag F3 gave the non-chalant tag of B1 prior to his touching first, without making any kind of verbal appeal or unmistakable act then I would rule safe.

In Summary it all depends upon the type of "action" involved as to whether or not the defense needs to appeal or not. As stated, generally speaking if action is "un-relaxed" an umpire will not honor an appeal. If action is 're-laxed" then an appeal is needed to get the out.

Pete Booth

[UmpJM]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

The problem with questions such as these is that in OBR it is not SPECIFICALLY covered, hence you will get all kinds of responses. FED covers it.

The general guidline from the authorities in determining whether an umpire will honor an appeal depends upon the type of "action" involved.

Generally speaking if action is "unrelaxed" no appeal will be honored. During unrelaxed action the runner is scrambling back etc.

if action is "relaxed" then the defense needs to appeal.

Now to the thread. It's a had to be there scenario.

If B1 over-ran first and then immediately tried to scramble back and touch the bag and was subsequently tagged I would record the out because of un-relaxed action.

Same as above except B1 was about 10 ft. or so past first not in a hurry to return and on his way back to the bag F3 gave the non-chalant tag of B1 prior to his touching first, without making any kind of verbal appeal or unmistakable act then I would rule safe.

In Summary it all depends upon the type of "action" involved as to whether or not the defense needs to appeal or not. As stated, generally speaking if action is "un-relaxed" an umpire will not honor an appeal. If action is 're-laxed" then an appeal is needed to get the out.

Pete Booth

Pete,

While I agree with your conclusions for the most part, I believe there is a material flaw in your reasoning - and I don't think it's just semantics.

Appeals most certainly are upheld and recognized during "unrelaxed action". It's just that the "proper constitution" of missed base & immediate return appeals (i.e. 7.10(b), (c), & (d) ) differs in a material respect during "relaxed" and "unrelaxed" action. That is, during "unrelaxed action" the appeal MUST be made by tagging the runner and a tag of the base is not recognized as a properly constituted appeal.

During unrelaxed action, either the runner or the base may be tagged. It's still an appeal regardless of whether the action is relaxed or unrelaxed.

JM

[PeteBooth]

[QUOTE=CoachJM]Pete,

While I agree with your conclusions for the most part, I believe there is a material flaw in your reasoning - and I don't think it's just semantics.

IMO we are talking semantics.

A base runner has the right during continuous action to correct their base-running mistakes. At that moment since the action is un-relaxed or another way to explain it is "during continuous action" we as umpires do not recognize appeals. IMO, a fielder tagging someone off the base or tagging someone who didn't touch the base to begin with is not an appeal it's called making a play on a runner.

Example:

R1 stealing on the pitch and overslides the base. He then immediately trys to correct his mistake. F4 standing on the base says "Hey Blue he missed second base" At that moment F4's appeal means nothing.

The runner has to be tagged. If a fielder tags the runner out he is not going to then "appeal it" unless it is the advantageous 4th out to cancel a run. Therefore IMO we are talking semantics concerning this play.

Pete Booth

[UmpJM]

Pete B.,

Let's say in the initial sitch, there were two outs and an R3. The play happens as described and the R3 scores before the F3 tags the BR as he is returning to the bag. Both the BU and F3 saw the BR miss the bag as he passed it.

Does the R3's run count?

If it's "just a tag out", it's a timing play and the R3 scores. If it's a 7.10(b) missed base appeal, it's a run-nullifying third out and the R3 doesn't score.

That's why I think it's not just semantics.

JM