And that "point" was correctly given to you by CoachJM (UmpJM) and others. Do as you wish in your own games, however.

And that point is determined to be when he touches home, or if he doesn't touch home, when he passes home. What's the issue?

Well, I think we have to give serious consideration to (b). The runner's baseline has been, I believe, more precisely defined in the rules that are new in the last two years. The rule now reads:
"Any runner is out when --
(a) (1) He runs more than three feet away from his baseline to avoid being tagged unless his action is to avoid interference with a fielder fielding a batted ball. A runner’s baseline is established when the tag attempt occurs and is a straight line from the runner to the base he is attempting to reach safely; ..." [my emphasis]

Before this new language was inserted, we needed an interpretation. But perhaps the new wording of the rule is intended to mean what it says, and the interpretation we are all used to is no longer completely valid. If so, for a runner who has not yet reached first base but is subject to a tag attempt, the baseline can only run one direction-- towards first base. The runner can't be trying to reach home safely, and so the baseline doesn't extend towards home.
I argue that if no tag is attempted, he is out when when he touches or passes home. If a tag is attempted, he would be out once he further retreats 3 feet.

Seems to me that in the OP, no tag has been attempted at all.

The phrase you emphasize is there because a line is the shortest distance between any TWO points.

The rule you are misusing states:

OBR 7.08 Any runner is out when-
(a) (1) He runs more than three feet away from a direct line between bases to avoid being tagged, unless his action is to avoid interference with a fielder fielding a batted ball;

If you'd rule the runner out onjust because he moves more than three feet towards home on a tag attempt, you would be making up your own rule.

mcrowder-- alternative (b) of the OP refers to a tag attempt: "b) as soon as he backs up three feet to avoid the tag;"

GarthB-- You have quoted the old rule, not the new rule. I did helpfully point out that the rule has changed, and that fact may alter interpretation, but you don't seem to have read for comprehension.
And of course a line is between two points. I think the new rule specifies the two points they have in mind, and in this situation (as opposed to a runner between his occupied and advance base, in which case there are generally two baselines defined by 3 points) one of the two points is the runner himself.

You are right, I forgot that my on disc rule book does not reflect the change in language, HOWEVER, the rule still describes the runner's deviation as "three feet away from his baseline". The baseline runs through the points, if not, any runner in a rundown would be out by your interpretation.

I had posted the word "abandonment" in a post earlier and nobody disagreed per se, but it seems as though there was a discrepancy between desertion and abandonment and I said, who cares what you term it, just call him out when it's appropriate and correct within the rules.

Problem with that is --- desertion doesn't apply yet either.

How about calling him out within the rules as well?

I think you are contending that the baseline runs from the runner to the base, and also extends behind the runner away from the base, and that this notion is required for a runner to escape a rundown. This is simply not correct, as evidenced both by black letter rule ("straight line from the runner to the base") , and by ordinary and long standing practice. Typically, as I alluded in my first post, there are two potential baselines for a runner between two bases, e.g. 1st and 2nd. The two potential baselines generally form an asymmetric V-shape, with the runner at the vertex of the V, and the bases at the tops of the V. If the runner is close to a direct line between the bases, the included angle of the V is large; if the runner is a skunk in the outfield, the angle of the V is acute. The line of extension away from the base past the runner is not in the baseline. For example, if the skunk is subject to a tag attempt, and runs more than 3 feet toward the outfield fence, he is out, even if he runs along one of the extended baselines. Some rundowns occur near the direct line between bases, and so each baseline looks like the extension of the other, but that is a coincidence, not a requirement.

No, actually I would be enforcing the rule as it is written today. The question is if an interpretation which takes into account the new phrasing would allow the runner to continue back toward home (which is not a safe haven) more than three feet during a tag attempt.

Even more curious, the runner can actually run toward the line-connecting-bases and be called out for leaving the baseline even though he is actually getting closer to the "baseline."

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

No, you would be enforcing the rule in accordance with your incorrect interpretation of the new wording. An interpretation contrary to that taught at proschool and PBUC. But go ahead. What do they know?:rolleyes:

Dave Reed,

Interesting theory, but I'm not buying it.

The change made to the wording of 7.08(a)(1) was simply a clarification of the proper interpretation of the phrase "his baseline" - namely that it is not the straight line between the bases, but rather a straight line between the runner being played on and the base he is trying to reach.

Whether that base provides a "safe haven" to said runner is NOT relevant to the proper application of 7.08(a)(1). The point is that he's heading to a base and trying to reach it without being tagged (i.e., "safely"), not that the base will provide him protection.

No different if a runner is retreating to a base he has been "forced from" (e.g. an R1 retreating to 1B after the F4 fields a grounder in "front" of him) or a runner is advancing to a base that is occupied by an entitled preceding runner.

The defense does not earn an out by getting a runner to move in the direction of a base that does not provide him sanctuary - they have to tag him. Home plate is a "special case" in that, by long-established official interpretation, a BR retreating toward home when he touches/passes home.

The clarification of the "his baseline" language doesn't change that.

In the immortal words of Crash Davis, "Don't think too much. It can only hurt the team."

JM

UmpJM's post got me thinking(not always a good thing) :)

How is the following situation different from opening post: 1 Out, R1 and R3. Batter hits the ball to F4 who looks R3 back and then chases R1 back to first. R1 overruns first and is standing 2 feet in foul territory. F4 steps onto first thus forcing out BR (eliminating force on R1) then throws home as R3 is attempting to run home. R3 ends up save at home and original R1 steps back onto first. What's the call?

Is R1 allowed to run past his original base without being automatically called out or does he have to be tagged? Is this different then OP with BR retreating past 3rd base foul line?