What have you got?

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by SAump

Muddied over R2 passing R3 are the actions of R3 retreating past 3B. I would add to your argument that R3 cannot legally run back toward 2B by rule. Things may have been different between bases, but a rule prevents R3 from running back to 2B after legally obtaining 3B. That cannot happen. I would also add to your argument that as long as R2 has not passed 3B, then R2 cannot be considered past R3. Like you, I am not convinced that R2 has passed R3 in this situation. Therefore, I cannot rule R2 out for passing a preceeding runner.

I agree the playing action on R3 places R3 in "limbo" until action allows an umpire to make an out call on R3. As presented, R3 must be out by tag and R2 must be safe on 3B. If both runners are considered "safe on the same bag" and both are tagged, then by rule, R2 would be out ( I also agree with you) as the bag belongs to R3 by FED rule 8-2-7 and OBR 7-3.

I hate to disagree with you, since you are kind of supporting my argument ... but I would ask you what rule you are using to claim that R3 cannot run toward 2nd. I'd love it to be true, but I don't believe it's true. He can't run the bases backward to create a travesty of the game ... but that doesn't mean he simply can't run the bases in reverse order at all.

Picture just R3. He gets caught in a rundown, is running from the catcher, gets to the bag and can't stop. He can certainly run back toward 2nd. You're not going to call him out the moment he takes a step toward 2nd, are you?

[ctblu40]

Originally Posted by SAump

Remember R2 is still on 3B. It would confuse me if I saw R3 heading to 2B.

OBR 7.08 (i) After he has acquired legal possession of a base, he runs the bases in reverse order for the purpose of confusing the defense or making a travesty of the game. The umpire shall immediately call “Time” and declare the runner out;

Yes, I feel the criteria of OBR 7.08(i) has been met. I thought this rule requires a runner to make an attempt to remain on his last legally acquired base or make an attempt to advance onward to the next base. R3 would be declared out for failing to maintain his last legally acquired base and retreating back toward 2B, while R2 has legally acquired 3B.

How is the criteria for this rule been met? At what point is R3 making a travesty of the game or attemting to confuse the defense? He tripped over the bag.
Since he's not touching the bag, and he's not between scoring and third, where is he? That's why I think R2 should be out, he has advanced to a point on the basepaths closer to scoring than R3.

[ctblu40]

Originally Posted by SAump

R2 while maintaining 3B is out and R3 while in LIMBO is in jeapoardy of being tagged out. That would be a double play. Just perfect if if I was convinced R2 had passed R3 on the base paths. How would you explain this without making UP the rules that Mr. Carlucci knows are not in place?

I think we can agree that thr rules don't cover every situation. So we as umpires do our best to find a rule that we think best fits the situation at hand. I think explain to the coach that R3 was in between 2nd and 3rd, and R2 was on 3rd, therefore, R2 was past R3. That' why R2 is out.

[ctblu40]

I just received an e-mail back from Mr. Roder with an answer to this question... interested?

[UmpJM]

ctblu40,

Quit teasing and spill the beans!

I'd be very curious to hear if Rick was able to make any sense of this thread.

JM

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by SAump

Remember R2 is still on 3B. It would confuse me if I saw R3 heading to 2B.

OBR 7.08 (i) After he has acquired legal possession of a base, he runs the bases in reverse order for the purpose of confusing the defense or making a travesty of the game. The umpire shall immediately call “Time” and declare the runner out;

Yes, I feel the criteria of OBR 7.08(i) has been met. I thought this rule requires a runner to make an attempt to remain on his last legally acquired base or make an attempt to advance onward to the next base. R3 would be declared out for failing to maintain his last legally acquired base and retreating back toward 2B, while R2 has legally acquired 3B.

What criteria were met?

How was he confusing the defense (not you, the defense)?

How was it a travesty?

I'm really glad you're too far away to ever have one of my games.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by SAump

R2 is on 3B and R3 makes it safely back to 2B.
Do you have anything other than R3 being out?

Yes, I have R2 out and R3 safe on 2nd. R3 can only be called out for running the bases in reverse if he is doing it to confuse the defense or to make a travesty of the game. Desperately trying to get to a base safely is neither of these.

In our case, we have R3 between 3rd and 2nd with F5 between R3 and 3rd. So he is now in a run down between 3rd and 2nd and may legally retreat to 2nd base.

R2 is out for allowing himself to get in front of R3.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by SAump

R2 is on 3B and R3 makes it safely back to 2B.
Do you have anything other than R3 being out?

What has happened to require R3 to be called out? Nothing, yet.

[Don Mueller]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

What has happened to require R3 to be called out? Nothing, yet.

R3 cannot retreat back to 2nd in this sitch. He's out for abandonment.

Rule 7.01 Comment: If a runner legally acquires title to a base, and the pitcher assumes his pitching position, the runner may not return to a previously occupied base.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by Don Mueller

R3 cannot retreat back to 2nd in this sitch. He's out for abandonment.

Rule 7.01 Comment: If a runner legally acquires title to a base, and the pitcher assumes his pitching position, the runner may not return to a previously occupied base.

The pitcher has not assumed his pitching position ... play is still ongoing.

[ctblu40]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

The pitcher has not assumed his pitching position ... play is still ongoing.

Since R3 is R3 and not R2, the pitcher has assumed a position with the runner in question on third base.

[3appleshigh]

Ok here it goes, Cece says the same as the first poster R2 is out for over running the precedding runner, Why you say??

He answers this with a question, same play, R3 trips on third to the outfield side, However the throw is an overthrow, and R3 proceeds to head Home, DOES HE NEED TO RETOUCH THIRD?? -- Yes he does, Therefore he must have retreated, and now R2 is infront of him. This is a fun debate, and after listening, I think I agree with Cece. Also Cece says he and Roder have argued on this rule before.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by ctblu40

Since R3 is R3 and not R2, the pitcher has assumed a position with the runner in question on third base.

But that's not what the rule says. It doesn't say "and the pitcher has assumed his position." It says "and the pitcher assumes his position." The pitcher must be in position for this rule to apply.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by SAump

R3 attempt to switch places with R2 is confusing to the defense.

Or maybe just to you.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by SAump

R2 is on 3B and R3 makes it safely back to 2B.
Do you have anything other than R3 being out?

Stick with the play at hand.

R3 didn't go back to 2B - he tripped over 3B and fell toward the outfield. You invented the R3 returning to 2B out of the murky depths of your imagination - in which case you could call R2 is out for passing R3 and leave R3 at 2B.