Missed first base

[blueump]

BR running to first on a ground ball. The first baseman stretches to catch the throw, with just his toes on the edge of the bag.

The BR (maybe even in an attempt to spike the first baseman) runs inside the line and trips over the heal of the first baseman, never touching the base. They both fall to the ground, although the first baseman keeps his foot on the bag and catches the ball.

The runner arrives first, but never touches the base. Is the foot part of the base? do you call him safe waiting for an appeal? or do you have an out?

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by blueump

BR running to first on a ground ball. The first baseman stretches to catch the throw, with just his toes on the edge of the bag.

The BR (maybe even in an attempt to spike the first baseman) runs inside the line and trips over the heal of the first baseman, never touching the base. They both fall to the ground, although the first baseman keeps his foot on the bag and catches the ball.

The runner arrives first, but never touches the base. Is the foot part of the base? do you call him safe waiting for an appeal? or do you have an out?

Wow. You're kidding right? "Is the foot part of the bag?" Really? I guess you've removed all doubt now.

As to the rest ... what do we normally do when the runner beats the throw, but misses the bag?

[blueump]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

Wow. You're kidding right? "Is the foot part of the bag?" Really? I guess you've removed all doubt now.

So, you have a first baseman with his foot on the bag, the runner steps directly on his foot, but technically never touches the bag, just the foot.
YOU would call him out on appeal??? Good thing I never umpire with you!

[LMan]

but you said F3's 'toes just on the edge of the bag.' Which is it?

Good thing I never umpire with you!

I'm sure Mike's heart is broken now, but perhaps he'll get over it. Someday.

[blueump]

Originally Posted by LMan

but you said F3's 'toes just on the edge of the bag.' Which is it?

I was using another situation to stress a point. Get over it.

Originally Posted by blueump

BR running to first on a ground ball. The first baseman stretches to catch the throw, with just his toes on the edge of the bag.

The BR (maybe even in an attempt to spike the first baseman) runs inside the line and trips over the heal of the first baseman, never touching the base. They both fall to the ground, although the first baseman keeps his foot on the bag and catches the ball.

The runner arrives first, but never touches the base. Is the foot part of the base? do you call him safe waiting for an appeal? or do you have an out?

Simple answer, without any comment - OUT. F3 has foot on base with ball before BR touches 1B.

[LMan]

Originally Posted by blueump

I was using another situation to stress a point. Get over it.

It's just funny to see you (again) rip into the first person who dares offer an opinion on your sitches. Which change with every post.

OK, back to the box for you

[LMan]

Originally Posted by BigGuy

Simple answer, without any comment - OUT. F3 has foot on base with ball before BR touches 1B.

Really? .......

[BigUmp56]

I have the batter-runner safe until put out on proper appeal.



Tim.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by blueump

So, you have a first baseman with his foot on the bag, the runner steps directly on his foot, but technically never touches the bag, just the foot.

First... that's not what you asked at all. Second - in such a scenario, I find it incredibly doubtful that BR would not touch the base at all. Not without breaking someone's ankle.

Good thing I never umpire with you!

Finally ... something we agree on.

(Did you REALLY ask ... "Is the foot part of the bag?"!?!?!?!)

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by BigGuy

Simple answer, without any comment - OUT. F3 has foot on base with ball before BR touches 1B.

Really ... so if BR misses first base and is 10 steps past, and F3 then catches the ball on the bag, based on this axiom, you rule an out?

We are being overrun, fellas. No wonder Tee and the true bigdogs here no longer post.

Originally Posted by LMan

Really? .......

If you want to call it out on appeal, fine. We don't know how close the foot on foot and ball to glove were apart. If it's bang bang, I call out. Given that,
it's because that's the way I was originally taught - runner doesn't touch base but passes it, I was taught, don't make SAFE call. Since joining this forum I have seen many say the way to do is call the runner safe, then let defense appeal the missed base. I have been trying to get clarification from some in our organization, but I haven't gotten any response. However, I am beginning to lean in the direction of the safe/appeal. I'm still not 100% convinced it's right to call a runner safe that hasn't touched the base, but I'm getting there and definitely see the logic.

[greymule]

Did anyone cite the code in this?

In OBR, it's a missed base, but last I remember, in Fed the BR was out if he missed 1B and F3 then caught the ball. Did Fed change their rule?

Really ... so if BR misses first base and is 10 steps past, and F3 then catches the ball on the bag, based on this axiom, you rule an out?

Yes, at least when I used to do Fed.

[LMan]

The present mechanic is to signal SAFE, and await an appeal (if there is one). The runner is considered safe when his body passes over the bag. Again, it is up to the defense to recognize that the runner missed the bag and to react accordingly. This goes for all codes AFAIK.

BG, I dont see how your method can work in real life. Runner steps over the bag, then 10 steps later the ball arrives at the mitt and you call OUT? Then I guess you are shouting "he missed the bag!" to the horde of offensive coaches who are having heart-attacks on the spot? You cant call OUT-he missed the bag at the time, because the ball hasnt arrived yet....

I know you said 'banger' for the OUT call, but if there's no one accepted mechanic, then we dont know how close the play has to be to call it one way or the other. Doesnt work. The runner either missed the bag before the throw, or he didnt.

[LMan]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

First... that's not what you asked at all.

Well, we went over that. He changes the sitch as the thread develops/deteriorates, to match his current argument. He calls it 'emphasizing a point,' I prefer 'making facts fit theory'