Strange appeal play

[UMP25]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I disagree. The original appeal was part of "continuing action" and doesn't negate the opportunity for a further appeal, even if the ball is thrown out of play.

Bob and Tee are correct. While the center fielder's throw to F3 was technically an "appeal," it is not considered a separate and distinct one; rather, it is part of continuous action. Consequently, any ball thrown out of play curing C. A. has no effect on whether an appeal can subsequently be made.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by UMP25

Bob and Tee are correct. While the center fielder's throw to F3 was technically an "appeal," it is not considered a separate and distinct one; rather, it is part of continuous action. Consequently, any ball thrown out of play curing C. A. has no effect on whether an appeal can subsequently be made.

I will stipulate to "continuous action" in this case if you can tell me one possible reason F8 had for throwing the ball to F3 other than to make an appeal. Was there any other possible play at first base? If the answer is "no," then I see no continuous action in this case. The runner did not "leave early," he missed the base. How can throwing to a base where there is no "action" to be found be considered "continuous?"

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I will stipulate to "continuous action" in this case if you can tell me one possible reason F8 had for throwing the ball to F3 other than to make an appeal.

I don't why he threw, Steve. He's a kid, he might not know why. But how would F8 know he missed the bag at first? There is no indication in the OP that anything verbal was going on at the time.

[UMP25]

Originally posted by SanDiegoSteve
I will stipulate to "continuous action" in this case if you can tell me one possible reason F8 had for throwing the ball to F3 other than to make an appeal. Was there any other possible play at first base? If the answer is "no," then I see no continuous action in this case. The runner did not "leave early," he missed the base. How can throwing to a base where there is no "action" to be found be considered "continuous?"

It is irrelevant whether there is "action" at first base or not, and it is also irrelevant whether he missed the base or left early--both are appeals in the technical sense. However, they're treated a bit differently in terms of allowing appeals when a ball is thrown out of the play. Continuous action (sometimes called "related action" as well) is a term that refers to the action, or everything that occurs, related to the primary play itself. One interesting way to "define" continuous action, so to speak, is how to tell when it's not occurring anymore: continuous action has ended when it would be appropriate to call "time."

IIRC, the J/R manual, which was used at school, has more info on continuous/related action.

[UmpJM]

Steve,

UMP25, Bob Jenkins, and Tim C. have this one right. (Though I might quibble with Tim on his distinction that the ball being thrown out of play was not part of an appeal. Whether or not it was part of an appeal is immaterial to the proper ruling as long as it was part of the "continuous action" of the play during which the baserunning infraction occurred.)

Namely, if the defense throws the ball out of play (i.e. "errs") while attempting a "continuous action" appeal, it does not negate the defense's opportunity to subsequently appeal after the ball is again made live (or while it is still dead under FED rules).

In addition to the J/R treatment referenced by UMP25, the following from the MLBUM discussion of appeals further supports this position (my emphasis).

(3) If the pitcher or any member of the defensive team throws the ball out of play when making an appeal, such act shall be considered an attempted play. No further appeal will be allowed on any runner at any base. (This refers to when an appeal is being made after a definite break in action.)

JM