Missed first base and then tagged
 

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?

GrizzlyUmp14,

If the BR is tagged while off the base, having missed 1B, he is out.

JM

Yes, Griz, the fact that F3 went after him and tagged him qualifies as an unmistakable appeal, with no verbalization necessary.

I have to disagree. BR is allowed to over run 1B. When he passes the bag, the BR has achieved the bag for purpose of the rule. Merely tagging him is not enough, an appeal must be an unmistakable act (as SDS writes) or a verbal request.

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

So if he says "blue, he missed the bag", while he tags him would that make it unmistakeable for you? If F3 tags the guy off the base, and BR has not made an attempt toward 2B, why do you think he is doing it? Unmistakeable is perhaps more definitive for you. I'm good to go with the immediate tag.

Not the same. Everyone in the park knows it's an appeal on the fly ball - it meets the <i> 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. </i>

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

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

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."

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.

kylejt,

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

JM

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.

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

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!

I think some of the confusion here is that everyone is interpreting the situation differently. I am not 100% certain of how this play went down. Initially I pictured the fielder bobbling it, swiping and missing a tag and then applying a tag just as the B/R passed first base. Others saw F3 missing a tag, realizing the B/R and then chasing the B/R. Yeah, if the F3 chased the B/R, it would seem to be an appeal.

I'm signalling safe and verbalizing "Safe! No tag!" If at that point F3 comes to BR and tags him, I've got an unmistakable appeal of the missed base, and 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.

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.

Quote:

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

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

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

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

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.

Steve,

Around here, "varsity summer baseball" is American Legion baseball and is played under "slightly modified" OBR, rather than FED.

Of course in this particular case, I don't believe there is a difference between the two in terms of the proper call - the text of the FED is just not ambiguous as is the text of OBR.

JM

Okay, out here they continue playing FED rules in "Coaches Summer League" as they are still the same HS teams.

We have American Legion, and many other summer leagues that use OBR, but anything high school related use FED rules.

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

Yep. Only a 9U player or something like that would tag every single runner returning to 1B as a habit. No one else would, and even if they did any umpire with a functioning brain stem would not call that a specific appeal.

In reality you would have a) people/players/coaches screaming at F3 that the runner missed the bag and b) F3 reacting to that and chasing down the runner to tag him to be sure. That is unmistakable.

You either have everyone see him overstep the bag, or no one saw it. In the first case the appeal will be unmistakable, in the second instance there is no appeal and the runner returns safely to 1B.

I'd like to think there is a third option. Neither everyone nor no one saw it. Just F3 and the BU. That would be enough for me.:)

Since this was a force play...mechanically speaking, the umpire must signal safe though...we can't be tipping off the defense with a no call...since it's a force either he's safe or out...now is it proper mechanics to signal "safe" and verbalize "no tag"...or is the safe signal followed by an appeal the proper way to handle this? I really think this is more of a mechanics question versus a rule question...and yes, it would be nice to have a video clip...

Since this was a force play...mechanically speaking, the umpire must signal safe though...we can't be tipping off the defense with a no call...since it's a force either he's safe or out...now is it proper mechanics to signal "safe" and verbalize "no tag"...or is the safe signal followed by an appeal the proper way to handle this? I really think this is more of a mechanics question versus a rule question...and yes, it would be nice to have a video clip...

[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

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

I can live with that. "Blue, he missed the bag," would not make it unmistakable; that would be a verbal request.

Gee whiz. :(