No such thing as a timing play?
 

Amer Legion - OBR

Runners at R2@2B & R1@3B 2 outs.

Ball hit to F5. R2 has passed F6 on the way to 3B, for whatever reason, F5 chases R2 who turns around heading back to 2B. By the time the tag is made, BR is at first and R1 has scored.

I score the run & out 3.

Coach has a mild myocardial infarction, I tell him its a timing play, BR reached 1st safely and R1 made it home.

Coach tells me there is no such thing as a timing play, thats softball (he knows I am primarily a FP umpire), that its a continuation play, the run should not score.

Well, I was confused so I just ended the convo ruling stood, end of story. Nearly had to eject the score keeper who was whining as well that it was a "continuation play"..

So I come to the experts.. what say you?

You're taking money to work this level of baseball, and you don't know this basic rule? I'm not usually like some of leatherheads that roam this board, but if you're taking cash to work Legion games, you've got to know this.

I teach 12 year old LL umpires to know this in their first month of training. They'll tap their wrist when timing plays are possible. Congratulations for failing my class.

Excuse me while I eject myself for being rude.

I say tack this onto your "stupid crap I've heard coaches say" board.

Right next to the time a coach told me "once a ball is foul, it's foul" when a bunt down the line crossed the foul line, hit the edge of the grass, and rolled back fair before touched by F1. Oddly enough, this was a Legion coach too. Maybe it's something in the water?

I had no clue what he was talking about, I just refused to engage in the convo when he said it.. I just wanted to be sure.

First, everyone gets rattled and confused from time to time. This was your real problem. How do you handle things when you get pressed and the mind takes an intermittent bleeep? You had the call right, you didn't give yourself time, and the coach a show of "respect" (yeah, he didn't deserve it but read on).

I am fortunate to work with partners who, in many ways, are better than I am :D . So I have a place to go to sort things out. If you don't this will work for you too.

When Coach comes out on you, and you feel yourself searching for the right response but can't find it,

"Coach, hold on just a minute."

Go over to your partner, if he is good, then talk it through, if not, then tell him "I'm coming over here to get a mental recharge, we had R2, R3, etc etc"...the rule will come back to you given a breather to think without being pressed.

Return to Coach (who by the very act of taking time to discuss his viewpoint shows "respect" for his (lousy) opinion.. that's what it will look like), "Coach, it's a timing play, I'm sure of it. Play and scoring stands."

An answer
 

Even Little League umpires can read OBR Rules:

That wasnt my question, my question was the term "continuation play" vs "timing play not existing in OBR" comment made by an long time 18U American Legion coach and a scorekeeper.

You little leaguers are going off in the wrong area. I thought perhaps the term was different or some other aspect of which I was not aware. I scored the run based on exactly what you quoted... which btw, does not include the term "timing play"

essentially checking nomenclature or perhaps a rule involving a "continuation play" of which I was not aware.

Question has been answers though, and thanks to those who did.

Uh huh ... "Timing play" is the ONLY correct answer. Please advise just where the term "Continuation play" appears in the OBR rules relating to scoring.

Tapping your wrist with two outs and a runner in scoring position is used in all levels of amature baseball to communicate to your partner you have a potential "timing play". It's not a mechanic you should so easily dismiss as one used only by "LL" umpires.


Tim.

Little league uses rules based on OBR. The timing play is the same regardless of rule set. The use of the "time play" signal is almost universal, and I don't find it lame in the least.

However, more important than understanding the signal, is an understanding of the rule. As far as the coach and his 'continuation' play, I would have just told him there is no such thing. How long would you debate with a coach who insists that the 'hands are part of the bat '?

Wadeintothem,

While interpretations manuals (notably J/R) use terms like the "continuous action of the play", primarily in dealing with the proper constition of an appeal, none of them introduces any notion that would suggest a run that scores after the 3rd out of the half-inning would be counted - because, by rule, it doesn't.

A "continuation play" is the ridiculous notion introduced in the NBA that allows a player to score a basket even though he was fouled well before he began to initiate a scoring attempt.

Your ruling was correct.

JM

A continuation play is when a basketball player gets fouled in the act shooting.

My point is that if you're getting paid to do upper level ball, you've GOT to know this. There can't even be a question in your mind.

It appeared to me that HE DID Know it, but wanted clarification, because a coach did a fantastic job talking out of his ***. We have all seen it, simply relax man.

Another sad example
 

You made the right call. Dumb rats make your job more difficult. You should have dumped these 2 immediately for disputing the call. Some umpires may wait 2 years to do this. That isn't right either, but it is part of a continuation play. ;)

Since the coach invoked softball, I'll extend the OP a bit and give an example of a difference between OBR and ASA softball.

In the OP, the run scored before the third out, so it counts (time play). However, if after the tag, F5 still had time to get the BR at 1B, he could have done so for a fourth out and nullified the run.

But in ASA softball, he could not. Even if the BR never left the batter's box, he cannot be put out for a fourth out (because he didn't score).

Uh.... what?
 

Maybe I haven't been at this forum long enough, but are you kidding me? I like to think I keep up with sarcasm and such, but perhaps I missed it here.

Other than the appeal section, where it talks about the "apparent 4th out," where else does it say anything about a 4th out nullifying a run? In anything - rulebook, interpretation, whatever?

Does this help?
 

OBR 7.10: Any runner shall be called out, on appeal, when --
Appeal plays may require an umpire to recognize an apparent “fourth out.” If the third out is made during a play in which an appeal play is sustained on another runner, the appeal play decision takes precedence in determining the out. If there is more than one appeal during a play that ends a half-inning, the defense may elect to take the out that gives it the advantage. For the purpose of this rule, the defensive team has “left the field” when the pitcher and all infielders have left fair territory on their way to the bench or clubhouse.

Well, if it doesn't; how about 2006 BRD#3, Pg 9-10 Appeals: Advantages Out at First: Live Action
FED, NCAA and OBR Point not covered. FED Official Interp. 2-3: Hopkins. NCAA Official Interp. 3-3: Fetchiet. OBR Official Interp. 4-3: Fitzpatrick. Advantageous 4th Out.

I'll assume that you mean that the transference to baseball is ridiculous. The continuation play as the NBA resolves it is a fine rule that disfavors the D for obvious reasons.

Hey, was observed and got invited to work a woodbat tourney with a bunch of teams comprised of players heading for AA and AAA ball..

When I get this who timing play sorted out, I might read up on balks. :rolleyes:

Tap on the wrist huh... ok well since its so common I will learn from ya in case a partner does it.
Thanks!
(see, you dont have to start at LL and work your way up.. you can just show up with solid softball mechanics and they are so impressed you are working 18U's and woodbat leagues).

Ha.

Wade, congratulations on your selection to do that wood bat tourny!!

No, you don't have to work your way up the ladder to be a successful umpire. I've met a few guys who work MiLB that have never even done HS. Of course those are few and far between and they were recent graduates of Harry's school working A ball.

And yes, some mechanics are the same, whether softball or baseball. What will trip you up, though, is not having a solid rule foundation. So, I highly suggest you 'read up' on balks.

I posted this before, but somehow it got deleted, but tapping on the wrist with index and middle fingers is the mechanic for "timing play" all the way up to and including the MLB level. If you pay close attention, you will see the PU on major league games signal like this with 2 outs and a time play situation.
It is most certainly not just a Little League mechanic.

Edited to please the nit-picker.

Huh? LL has this very mechanic. I don't officiate LL but I know for a fact that this is a LL mechanic.

Oh, alright. You must live in Rio Linda too. I meant not exclusively a Little League mechanic, but a mechanic in every level of baseball. I didn't realize that I had to draw a diagram.

Can someone please tell me what I just read?

Ace

The only place I heard "continuation play" was in basketball.

bob

Enlightenment
 

The coach may have been using the right terminology to describe the next immediate play after the 3rd out was made; while at the very same time, incorrectly applying a rule that does not exist; e.g. counting the run after an advantageous 4th out has been made at 1B.
"If the action is continuing and the tagged base is a "force" base, the defense makes the appeal merely by "stepping on the missed base."
A continuation play, in the proper context of the rules, is acceptable to the baseball community.

Asking the experts:
 

A coach runs out of the dugout to argue a call and incorrectly quotes a rule that does not exist {e.g., see OP}. You calmly try to explain your reasoning and he loudly disagrees. He is not listening to your argument, he is only trying to show you UP {slang term}. Would you immediately eject him?

I don't know about others might handle it, but depending on how he came running out of the dugout he just might find himself on the way to the parking lot. I'm not fond of coaches who run at me to argue a call.


Tim.

What's faster than immediately?

I never heard the term until this thread, which is why I asked this board. I'm glad I asked. I wish I had known it is a basketball term (cant stand basketball, so I would never have heard of it) at the time of the convo with the coach. I woulda had a good laugh.

What's faster than immediately?

How about instantaneously?

No, it doesn't help...
 

Actually, when I wrote "apparent 4th out" originally. I was referring to appeal plays. I should have written: "Aside from the 'apparent 4th out' on an appeal play, when would that actually happen?" (Aside from a team trying to get over?) My bad for not being more clear.

Greymule's posting said "However, if after the tag, F5 still had time to get the BR at 1B, he could have done so for a fourth out and nullified the run." That is NOT an appeal play, so your quote of OBR 7.10 - and all the other manual pages - is irrelevant. He's saying in his "however" - unless I misunderstand, and he wants to clarify - that the defense made the equivalent of a 5-3 play for this 4th out.

Please tell me that teams, noticing a BR has stopped running to 1st in this sitch, throw to F3 to claim an appeal of a "missed base," or try to say the last out is a force, and thus the run doesn't count.

Sorry, but if a team does that with me, when I'm done chuckling, I send them on their way to bat. Again, if someone wants to quote a rule for me, I'm game to listen.

Good one. I'll buy it. :D

Well, if a protest committee buys into the BRD or J/R, you might not be laughing last.

From J/R Chapter 10:
" ...3----Not an appeal: Bases loaded, two outs. The batter singles and R2 is thrown out at home for the third out. The batter has been injured and is unable to advance to first, prompting the defense to throw to first against him: this is a advantageous fourth out and supercedes the former third out, and no run can score."

The BRD (2004 ed., article 3) quotes Hopkins (FED), Fetchiet (NCAA), and Fitzpatrick (OBR, or PBUC probably) as all giving the same interpretation as J/R. Childress also comments "Color me not only italized but surprised. I mean, astonished."

For what it is worth (very little), I'm not astonished. Nothing about 7.10(d) says the 4th out is peculiar to appeal plays. Advantageous outs are only mentioned in the context of appeal plays, but that's the only time they are likely to occur.

Greymule's posting said "However, if after the tag, F5 still had time to get the BR at 1B, he could have done so for a fourth out and nullified the run." That is NOT an appeal play, so your quote of OBR 7.10 - and all the other manual pages - is irrelevant. He's saying in his "however" - unless I misunderstand, and he wants to clarify - that the defense made the equivalent of a 5-3 play for this 4th out.

That's right. The defense made a 5-3 play for the 4th out. I agree that this would not be an appeal. It's just a 5-3 out. However, I think there was once (quite a while back by now) a question about this, and it merited an "approved ruling" or something.

Please tell me that teams, noticing a BR has stopped running to 1st in this sitch, throw to F3 to claim an appeal of a "missed base," or try to say the last out is a force, and thus the run doesn't count.

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here. If the defense threw to 1B in time and got a fourth out before the BR arrived, no runs could score on the play. Since I had injected softball earlier, I will say that in ASA softball, the defense cannot get this out at 1B if there are already 3 outs.

Would Fed 9-1-1 suffice?
 

Exceptions: A run is not scored if the runner advances to home plate during action in which the third out is made as follows.
a. by the batter-runner before he touches first base; or
b. by another runner being forced out; or
c. by a proceeding runner who is declared out because he failed to touch one of the bases or left a base too soon after a caught fly ball; or
d. when a third out is declared during a play in which an umpire observed a base-running infraction resulting in a force out (this out takes precedence if enforcement of it would negate a score); or
e. when there is more than one out declared by the umpire which terminates the half inning, the defensive team may select the out which is to its advantage as in 2-20-2. Credit the putout to the nearest designated baseman. ...

What would you call in this situation? I know the correct answer.

With two out, R2 scores from second on B1's single, but fails to touch the plate. B1 becomes the third out when he tries to go to second. Right after the out, R2 returns and touches the plate.

Even if they stay outside the baselines? What difference does it make if they run, walk or roll as long as they stay outside the lines?

I find coaches who run to the lines funny, like a carnival show, always brings a smile to my face. :D :D

Fitty, you allow coaches to run out of the dugout in your games? What does staying outside the lines have to do with it?

My training and experience, while probably not as extensive or adequate as yours, has taught me that without the benefit of asking for time and having it granted, a coach who runs out onto the field to argue is at risk for an early exit.

WTF do the baselines have to do with it? There's nothing that says "arguing in foul territory is allowed but arguing in fair territory isn't"

Running at the umpire is often interpreted as "showing up the umpire" (if not all by itself, then in conjunction with other acts). A manager who runs / charges at the umpire is going to have a shorter leash than one who walks out to discuss the play.

Timing play?
 

:) You said that you primarly do FP, so you were out of your comfort zone. I guess you were needed or a regular baseball ump would be doing the game. The important thing is that you "learned" something that you will never forget. There are some STUPID coaches out there! And there is a timing play in SB. You mentioned that you were mostly a SB ump, and you did not mention you had problems with the baseball strike zone. If your only mistake was the timing play thing, you did well.
Experience is a great teacher. ;)

What would you call in this situation? I know the correct answer.

With two out, R2 scores from second on B1's single, but fails to touch the plate. B1 becomes the third out when he tries to go to second. Right after the out, R2 returns and touches the plate.

No run.

Choices: Appeal vs Time Play
 

Choices: Appeal vs Time Play

Touching the plate after the 3rd out was made by the defense may be too late.
If the umpire considers this as a possible timing play, the run would not score by rule.

Crossing the plate, before the 3rd out was made, may have removed the timing play.
If umpire considers "last-time-by," does R2 have to return and touch the plate?
If R2 doesn't return and touch the plate, an umpire may score the run.
After the run scored, retouching the plate only adds a "stomp" of approval.
If R2 returns and touches the plate, an umpire may score the run.
If the umpire considers this as a possible appeal play, the run would score.

Grey,

Unless the defense lodges a proper appeal on R2 missing the plate he's assumed to have scored. So, no appeal in the play as you've presented it, run scores on the timing play.


Tim.

Unless the defense lodges a proper appeal on R2 missing the plate he's assumed to have scored. So, no appeal in the play as you've presented it, run scores on the timing play.

I know that's the rule in the general case, but I remember reading a case play in which Abel misses the plate and then Baker is out at home for the third out as Abel is returning in an obvious attempt to correct his miss. The "answer" was that Abel's run didn't count. No appeal required. This stuck in my mind because in a semipro game 30 years ago I was actually involved in that play as "Abel."

I was returning to touch the plate when the next runner was put out, largely because he saw me returning and slowed down. (Needless to say, I wasn't the most popular guy on the team for a while.) The ump called the runner out and then pointed to me and said, "And you don't count." When I came up to bat again, I asked him why a miss of home wouldn't be an appeal play, and he responded, "Well, maybe you're right." (I am very thankful we won the game, because it saved me 30 years of nightmares.)

So I was confident that I had been robbed, and looked for substantiation. But in doing so I found (wish I could remember where) a case play identical to the play that happened, and it said the run would not count, the key being that the runner was obviously trying to correct his miss.

Steven Tyler, you posed the play and say you know the answer. What do you say it is?

Is it possible that the case play you recall is one dated back when we used to call a runner out in FED for missing a base without waiting for a proper appeal?


Tim.

Is it possible that the case play you recall is one dated back when we used to call a runner out in FED for missing a base without waiting for a proper appeal?

That's a good surmise, since after the third out the runner couldn't correct his miss, but I don't believe so. I didn't see any Fed publication until many years later. I recollect that this was an OBR play, but I certainly didn't have any official OBR case book and was unaware even of the existence of supporting publications like J/R, PBUC, etc.

I have some recollection of its being in the Sporting News, when they used to have "Hal the Referee" of the Cleveland Plain Dealer to explain rules and pose and answer questions. It also could have been in one of those "Knotty Problems" books or something similar.

Maybe it hinges on just how obvious the miss was and whether it was clear to everybody in the park that the runner was returning to correct a miss.

PS. I do specifically remember writing to Hal the Referee about somebody's claim that, in OBR, a popup that lands a few feet short of 2B and then spins backward across the line between home and 1B into foul territory is a fair ball. Hal either knew the answer himself or asked a MLB umpire, and subsequently published the answer in the Sporting News: foul ball, because it did not go past a base.

This one has me stumped then. I don't see how the run wouldn't score absent a proper appeal. A proper appeal has to be initiated by the defense so as to be unmistakeable to the umpire. I've never heard of an appeal being upheld because everyone knew, or thought they knew there was a miss, yet didn't say or do anything to announce the appeal.


Tim.

This one has me stumped then.

But you might be 100% correct. All I'm going by is memory of a case play reinforced by the fact that I was involved personally in a similar play.

If it was indeed Hal the Referee, who can say the he was correct or even that the MLB umpire he asked was correct? And who can vouch for the accuracy of Knotty Problems or any of a number of similar books?

Choices
 

2006 BRD discusses both possibilities. I would add that scoring the run appears to be more practical than the theoretical alternative of erasing the run. Someone brighter than me may explain when one choice is favored over the other.

With two out, R2 scores from second on B1's single, but fails to touch the plate. B1 becomes the third out when he tries to go to second. Right after the out, R2 returns and touches the plate.

Ruling: Legal. The run scores and the missed base cannot be appealed after R2 touches it.

Ruling: Legal. The run scores and the missed base cannot be appealed after R2 touches it.

Where is this ruling from?

I believe it was stated earlier in this thread. You can't have an out until you have an appeal. R2 went back and touched the base so it cannot be appealed. Once the runner has gone past the base, the runner is considered to have acquired it, and until upon proper appeal, is safe. The timing part is not relevant for a proper appeal once the runner went back and touched it.

No advantageous fourth out.

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by BigUmp56
I don't know about others might handle it, but depending on how he came running out of the dugout he just might find himself on the way to the parking lot. I'm not fond of coaches who run at me to argue a call.


Tim.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Originally Posted by fitump56
Even if they stay outside the baselines? What difference does it make if they run, walk or roll as long as they stay outside the lines?

I find coaches who run to the lines funny, like a carnival show, always brings a smile to my face. :D :D

Bob if you feel threatened or upset when a coach runs to a foul line acting like an ***, OK by me. I don't so as long as they stay off the field, I'm not as thin skinned as BigUmp566, as I said, I find them humurous.

People on this forum get some kind of kiddie thrill announcing how in control they are, tough on managers, etc. I think its all bluster and rare action myself but, hey, let them live their fantasies, makes me no repose.

Operative word is interpreted. I don't interpret coaches who stay off the field as any big deal and this "showing up", I really never bought into much of that either. Asses who act like asses are asses. If another player or participant or fan looks at an *** being an *** and somewhow comes to the conclusion that I am the ***, know what, I just located another ***...sitting in the stands. Let me get bent out of shape worrying about how the asses view my skills? Don't think so.:eek:

I don't think it's being too thin skinned to expect a certain level of decorum from a coach or player. I'm sure the umpires that have had to follow behind you and clean up your mess would agree.


Tim.

Name one. Your idea of decorum and my idea of decorum are entirely different. Also, LL vs MSBL 18+ ball are two entirely different, waaaaaaay different, skill environments.

I enjoy a level of high respect and one reason is that I don't pull the plug on adult coaches who actually may have a purpose and point to their anxiety. Your experiences must be different.

Your turn. See if you can refrain from including underhanded, personal slights, it would be appreciated. :D :D

It's nothing personal, believe me. It's a fact that umpires who allow the games participants to act like total idiots because it amuses them leave a mess behind that the next umpire will have to clean up. Your idea of respect and mine are just different I suppose.


And as far as the MSBL league you're so fond of, you can have it. Working mens leagues where too many of the players are overgrown adolescents with poor attitudes is not for me.

Tim.

I believe it was stated earlier in this thread. You can't have an out until you have an appeal. R2 went back and touched the base so it cannot be appealed. Once the runner has gone past the base, the runner is considered to have acquired it, and until upon proper appeal, is safe. The timing part is not relevant for a proper appeal once the runner went back and touched it.

No advantageous fourth out.

Well, I can see the logic of that argument, and you might well be right, but there's also logic that says you can't correct a miss after 3 are out, combined with the fact that the runner obviously attempted to correct his miss. To me that adds a wrinkle that makes this play not quite fit neatly into a black-and-white rule. I was wondering whether you had taken your question from a case play or a ruling. Apparently the BRD 2006 "discusses both possibilities."

Incorrect, try again.

Rule Difference?
 

{From pg. 277.}
OFF Interp 313-462: Fitzpatrick: A runner who misses the plate may return to touch it even after the defense has attained a third out during live action.
See Play #237-462. Ruling: Legal. R2's return was still part of the "playing action." The runs scores.
{From pg. 278.}
AO 62-462: J/R: R2, 2 outs: ... "If R2 returns to the plate and touches it after the out at second base, his "touch or pass' of home plate has occurred after the third out, and cannot be counted; this is a time play." (81)

I dont' feel threatened or upset, and "field" includes both fair and foul territory. IF he runs to the end of his dugout, then I have nothing.

Running at the umpire is not much different from waving arms, pointing, drawing lines, yelling, thorwing a hat, kicking dirt, etc. All of those activities give the coach a (much) shorter leash than calmly discussing the play.

After I EJ'd a coach last year, he came back out (this time calmly) and asked, "Don't I have a right to be upset?" I responded, "Yes, but you still have to act appropriately."

Originally Posted by fitump56
Bob if you feel threatened or upset when a coach runs to a foul line acting like an ***, OK by me. I don't so as long as they stay off the field,

Thanks for the discourse, Bob.