Declared out vs. put out
 

Just to make sure, I want to review something we discussed a couple of years ago. This is OBR:

Bases loaded, 2 out. On a 3-2 count with the runners going, ball 4 gets away from F2. The runner from 2B rounds 3B, and F2 throws to put that runner out before the runner from 3B crosses the plate. Ruling (straight from the OBR book): Three outs, but the run from 3B is still permitted to score on the award.

However:

Bases loaded, 2 out. Ball 4 gets away from the catcher. The runners are in no hurry, but the batter, thinking there's a chance for 2 bases, sprints to 1B and rounds the bag, passing the runner on 1B before the runner from 3B crosses the plate. Ruling: Three outs, no run, because the BR was "declared out" rather than "put out."

Is that correct?

In both situations, R3 is awarded his advance base due to the force. This is not a timing play. Run scores in both situations.

In FED, that's true. In OBR, the OP is correct.

Bob... Please explain with more detail. I have read 4.09 a, exceptions 1,2,3, 7.04b comment and 7.08 h. These rules do not support your call. I don't have my J/R at work so perhaps it's in there.

Thanks for your input. And I was not aware that Fed called it differently.

It doesn't seem to be covered in MLBUM, J/R, JEA, or Knotty Problems.

The basic rule says runners "forced to advance" cannot cause a nullification of the run by being put out. The B/R is not a runner forced to advance.

Also, in OBR if with two outs a B/R his a HR and passes a runner the B/R is out and only the runs scored before the passing count even though the others were awarded home.

J/R does cover it, but in a different section-- Determining a Run.

"Exception: Time play criteria do not apply to a consecutive runner at third who is awarded home due to a B/R's award to first (BB, HBP,etc.). All that is required in such a case for the run to score is that the B/R touch first and the runner from third touch home."

Also, the comment following the basic rule 7.04(b), which as you point out involves a forced runner overrunning his awarded base, gives the following rationale:
"Even though two are out, the run would score on the theory that the run was forced home by the base on balls and that all the runners needed to do was proceed and touch the next base."

I think this supports J/R, because the rationale seems to fit equally well the B/R overrounding first base.

OK, so bases loaded, 2 outs, ball 4, R3 touches home, R1 misses 1st, proceeds to 2nd. All other runners move up one more base.

Defense appeals R1 missing 1st.

No run? According to J/R...

It's not that hard. If the out is made buy a runner who is forced, the run counts. B/R is not forced...timing play.

In case this is a serious inquiry, J/R say:
"There cannot be a run if.....the third out is: ....the batter-runner on appeal for missing first,"

The run scores because R3 was forced home. The third out was R2 after he touched 3rd (to which he was forced to by the BR awarded ball 4). The third out was not a force out or the BR not attaining 1st base.

Let's see here.... I say incorrect!

Bases loaded, 2 out. Batter walks, all runners have to move 1 base. BR touches 1st base then passes R1.

BR is out - 3 out, score the run on the force from the walk.

"...buy a runner..."

In these days of inflated salaries, how much would it cost?

Bob

How much would it cost to buy some software which blocks people from posting to several day old threads to point out a typo?