FED 2002 Baseball Casebook

[greymule]

Can anyone give a definitive answer to a question that several of us umpires argued about for much of one meeting last year, with no resolution. A new entry in the 2002 FED Baseball Casebook reminds me of the play in question:

8.2.5 SITUATION: With R1 on first and no outs, B2 hits a long fly ball over the head of F8. R1 thinks the ball will fall in for a hit and attempts to advance to third. However, F8 makes the catch. F8 throws to first base, but the ball goes into dead ball territory. R1, who is attempting to return to first base, is between second and third base when the ball becomes dead. Ruling: A runner may not return to a base that he left too soon on a caught fly ball if he was on or beyond a succeeding base when the ball became dead, or if he advances and touches a succeeding base after the ball became dead. Upon a proper appeal, R1 shall be called out.

OK. That's clear in FED (and MLB, too, I assume). My question is this: If the retreating runner was between second and third when the throw left the fielder's hand but had retouched second and was on his way back to first when the throw went into dead ball territory, now he has the right to retouch first. But where do you place the runner?

ASA specifically covered this play in POE #33 in its 2001 Rule Book: the runner is awarded home (two bases from the last base legally touched when the throw left the fielder's hand--second--regardless of which direction he's was going). ASA of course now allows a runner to return even if the ball is dead, so now he wouldn't have to be between first and second when the ball became dead.

But in FED, where would I place the runner? I said home. The other umps said third: two bases from the base he had to retouch. Was I correct? MLB or FED softball any different?

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by greymule
But in FED, where would I place the runner? I said home. The other umps said third: two bases from the base he had to retouch. Was I correct? MLB or FED softball any different?

The other umps were correct. Under OBR, the runner could retouch even if he was still between 2nd and 3rd when the ball became dead (as long as he didn't advance after the ball ecame dead).

[Bfair]

greymule, you highlight an interesting play in light of the Fed's recent change of their appeal rule, the wording of their rules, and the caseplay 8-2-5 they have revised.

RETOUCHING A MISSED BASE
First, under all rules, a player's ability and legality to return to touch a missed base is determined at the time the ball becomes dead. In OBR, the runner may be anywhere beyond the base he had a time of pitch, and he may return provided he does not continue past or touch a succeeding base after the time the ball became dead. In Fed, if he is on or beyond the base succeeding the base he missed and the ball becomes dead, he may not legally return to touch the missed base. Also, like OBR, if he is not beyond such succeeding but continues to touch it after the ball became dead, then he may not legally return to touch the missed base.

Under both sets of rules, if the player:

• does not return to retouch the missed base, or
  
• returns and touches a base that he is not legally allowed to retouch

the defense must appeal in order to gain the out.

THE AWARD OF 2 BASES
In OBR, per PBUC 3.11, the award of 2 bases after a catch is based on the base occupied at the time of the pitch, regardless of the runner's location or his actions at the time the ball becomes dead.

In Fed, per 8-3-5b, where the award originates would be based on the runner's actions at the time the ball became dead.
That is, the award after a catch would be based on his location at the time of the throw UNLESS a runner "who is returning to touch a base after a batted ball has been caught is prevented from doing so because a thrown live ball has become dead". In such exception, the award would be 2 bases from base occupied at the time of the pitch.

I read that to mean the runner must be attempting return after a catch and when a ball becomes dead in order for the award to be from his original base at time of pitch. However, if he is not attempting return at the time the ball becomes dead after a catch, then the award would based upon his location in the basepath a the time the throw left the fielder's hand.

I'm not certain if that is what the Fed had in mind with their wording, but that is what it states and what I would determine after reading their caseplays.

Of course, under live ball conditions, all runners may return to touch missed bases regardless of how far they advanced unless a subsequent runner has touched home, or (under Fed) he has entered the dugout.

Just my opinion,

Freix

[Carl Childress]

Greymule:

I don't know anything about the softball rules.

The "awards" half of the play is easy: It's the same at FED, NCAA, or OBR:

When a runner has left a base too soon (always obvious to everyone), if a subsequent throw by a fielder goes dead, the runner receives two bases measured from the base occupied at the time of the pitch.

The "baserunning" half (when may he retouch without penalty) of the play is different at every level.

If it is a FED game, the runner may return to touch the base and then receive his award. But if he had touched (or was beyond) a subequent base at the time the ball becomes dead, on a timely appeal, he would be out.

If it is an NCAA game, the runner may return if he had started back by the time of the throw.

If it is an OBR game, the runner may return unless he has advanced and touched a base AFTER the throw because dead.

Ain't baseball grand?

[greymule]

Many thanks to bob jenkins, Bfair, and Carl Childress for responding in such detail to my question. This play is finally becoming clear to me, though I did not know that the various organizations specified such differences depending on the actions of the runner after the ball becomes dead.
However, I'm still trying to understand what the FED book is describing in 8.3.5.b: "When a runner who is returning to touch a base after a batted ball has been caught is prevented from doing so because a thrown live ball has become dead . . . his [2-base] award shall be from the base he occupied at the time of the pitch." That would seem to describe the runner in their case play 8.2.5, who was trying to return to first but was prevented from doing so because the ball became dead while he was still between 2d and 3d. In their casebook ruling, the runner is out on appeal because, even though he was returning, he was "on or beyond a succeeding base when the ball became dead." So how can he get a 2-base award when he isn't allowed to return to 1st? Or am I interpreting their words incorrectly?

This is a great web site.

[Carl Childress]

Greymule:

Let me begin with a BTW: FED does not use decimal points (dots, periods, whatever you call them) between sections of their rules. Your citation should read 8-4-5b.

The FED casebok uses the decimals: 8.3.4 Situation I, for example.

I bring this up because I looked in the casebook for 8.4.5b and couldn't find it. "Ah, ha," said I to my smart self, "Smart Self, he's still working with the 2001 casebook." So I dug that out and ....

Remember, the runner always get two bases from the time of the pitch when the ball is dead. (That's directly in the FED book right where you're reading.)

Last year, the umpire would have turned to R1 and said: "You -- go to the bench. He's out." No appeal, right?

This year: He's going to get that award. The umpire says: "You -- third base!" And R1 goes to third.

And the defense appeals that he left first too soon.

And the umpire NOW calls him out.

See? He gets the award, but his retouch at first does not cure his baserunning error because he had passed a subsequent base at the time the ball went dead.

[Bfair]

Originally posted by Carl Childress

When a runner has left a base too soon (always obvious to everyone), if a subsequent throw by a fielder goes dead, the runner receives two bases measured from the base occupied at the time of the pitch.

Fed Rule 8-3-5b:

ARTICLE 5. An award is from the base determined as follows:
a. If the award is the penalty for an infraction such as a balk, use of detached player equipment, or an illegal glove/mitt, the award is from the base occupied at the time of the infraction.
b. If any pitch (batted or unbatted) is followed by a dead ball before the pitcher is in position for the next pitch and before there is any throw by the fielding team, any award is from the base occupied at the time of the pitch.

When a runner, who is returning to touch a base after a batted ball has been caught is prevented from doing so because a thrown live ball has become dead (5-1 -1 g), his award shall be from the base he occupied at the time of the pitch. In any situations other than (a) or (b), on a batted ball which is the first play by an infielder, all runners including the batter-runner are awarded two bases from their positions at the time of the pitch. For purposes of this rule, the act of fielding is not considered a play. If every runner, including the batter-runner, has advanced one base at the time of the first play, the award is two bases from the time of the throw. For any subsequent play by an infielder or for any throw by an outfielder, the award is two bases from the time of the throw. [all emphasis mine]

I have bolded the pertinent information relative to this situation. The Fed states the runner "who is returning" would get two bases from time of pitch. It does not state a runner "who is required to return" would get to bases from time of pitch. The closing statement of the rule would apply to a runner "not returning" to touch a base after a catch, and as it states, that award is 2 bases from the time of the throw.

With the past Fed appeal rule, this wording was of no relevance since any player at or beyond a subsequent base would be declared out automatically when the ball became dead. Therefore, the fact of whether or not he was returning was of no significance. If the runner were in such position at time of throw that the he could return by rule, that meant he was not on or beyond a subsequent base. Therefore, the base obtained at time of throw and that which he had at time of pitch were the both the same base and the same basis of the award.

NOW, with the change of the Fed appeal rule, and with the addition to of the stipulation in caseplay 8.2.5:

Upon a proper appeal, R1 shall be called out.

the fact of whether the runner is attempting return or not at the time the ball becomes dead NOW becomes a factor. A runner beyond a subsequent base and not attempting return, per the wording of the rule, would receive to bases from his location at time of throw. If another caseplay exists to disprove this, then I have not found it, and please feel free to present it. Until such time as a ruling comes forth, I feel the wording of the rule should be followed.

We all know that any runner beyond a subsequent base cannot LEGALLY return to touch his original base, but he may ILLEGALLY return to touch it, and then accept his award. The defense may then APPEAL the act of the illegal return for which we would then declare the runner out. The problem we will face as officials is that neither the offense nor the defense may know that the return of such a runner is illegal. The offense may attempt that illegal retouch, and upon seeing the retouch, the defense may never appeal it. I'd think that we'd need to have our award correct, per the rules, should that situation arise.

Childress, I don't know whether or not you properly made this change to your BRD, but if you didn't, then it's a difference you don't have listed. You would either need to obtain a ruling to support that "time of pitch" applies to a runner "required" to return for retouch after a catch, or correct the BRD one more time. As of now, it appears the "time of pitch" only applies if the runner "who is returning" cannot do so because the ball becomes dead. Remember, it's not up to you to make the rules in the BRD, only report them. I feel what I have shown here highlights the error of your quoted statement.

This may not be what the Fed meant, but as of now it is what they state. Because of the wording of their rule, the award is based on the action of the runner at the time the ball becomes dead. The Fed has caseplays in the casebook that are in error due to lack of coordinating all the adjustments properly related to their recent change in appeal procedures. It is possible this is an oversight on their behalf---but that's not your choice Childress---it's theirs. If it needs correction then I trust they will address the issue, but I hope you are not attempting to do so unilaterally.

Just my opinion,

Freix

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by Bfair
[B [/B]

I have quoted above everything important in your post.

Lah, me:

Talk about discussing how many angels can sit on the head of pin....

Here are the only points I made about FED:

1. If a runner leaves a base too soon, when the ball goes dead his award will be two bases measured from the time of the pitch.

2. If the runner's position is beyond a subsequent base and the ball goes dead, he is in jeopardy of an out on appeal after he receives his award.

Do you agree those two sentences accurately reflect NFHS rules?

Whether the runner has started back or is still running forward is absolutely irrelevant to any award.

Who do you think you are kidding with all that verbiage?

I want anyone who cares to note:

You spent hundreds of words to demonstrate less than nothing, yet you won't answer the simple question (one word would suffice) at Rules/Obstruction on the URC.

It's been sitting there more than two days, and I already jogged your memory over at eTeamz.

Quit doging, or people will begin to think -- exactly what they ought to think.

[Bfair]

Originally posted by Carl Childress

Here are the only points I made about FED:

1. If a runner leaves a base too soon, when the ball goes dead his award will be two bases measured from the time of the pitch.

2. If the runner's position is beyond a subsequent base and the ball goes dead, he is in jeopardy of an out on appeal after he receives his award.

Do you agree those two sentences accurately reflect NFHS rules?

Whether the runner has started back or is still running forward is absolutely irrelevant to any award.

That is not what the Fed rules state, is it?

Have you a caseplay or ruling that change their rules?

Are you making up your own rules again?



Freix

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by Bfair

That is not what the Fed rules state, is it?

Freix

My book is likely the same as yours.

FED 8-3-5b: "When a runner, who is returning to touch a base after a batted ball has been caught, is prevented from doing so because a thrown live ball has become dead, his award shall be from the base he occupied at the time of the pitch."

Now, here's a play:

R1 leaves early, touches second, nears third, and stops when he realizes the ball was caught and he has no chance to return safely to first. But the outfielder overthrows first, and the ball goes dead.

Are you telling the world that FED rules require the umpire to award R1 HOME PLATE?

Please, no freaking novels.

YES.

NO.

Pick one!

[greymule]

If I had to rule on that play you just described, Papa C, I would give the runner home, and then he's out on appeal at 1st. By giving him only 3d, I'm announcing to the defense that he left 1st too soon. Play: R1 on first, long fly to center. R1 goes back to tag up, leaves 1st slightly before the diving catch at the center field wall. I saw him leave early but maybe the defense didn't. He rounds second, and is running to third. Throw to get him at third goes into the stands.

It seems to me that if I give him only third, I'm telling the defense that he left first too soon. I'm saying, "Two from the time of the pitch from the base you had to return to." I have to act as if he tagged up properly and leave it to the defense to appeal.

Now in your example, I admit that the runner did STOP and the defense overthrew 1ST, not 3d, an indication that they knew he hadn't tagged up. But it seems to me that (1) the important thing is that he was not RETURNING, (2) I shouldn't assume that his stop is an announcement that he knows he has to return to first but figures he has no chance, and (3) it doesn't matter which base they overthrow.

I sincerely hope this play never comes up in a game of mine.

I'm amazed at the controversy my question has caused, but at least now I feel that my confusion wasn't due to stupidity.

P.S. From now on, I will use appropriate punctuation in citing books. Thanks.

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by greymule
If I had to rule on that play you just described, Papa C, I would give the runner home, and then he's out on appeal at 1st. By giving him only 3d, I'm announcing to the defense that he left 1st too soon. Play: R1 on first, long fly to center. R1 goes back to tag up, leaves 1st slightly before the diving catch at the center field wall. I saw him leave early but maybe the defense didn't. He rounds second, and is running to third. Throw to get him at third goes into the stands.

It seems to me that if I give him only third, I'm telling the defense that he left first too soon. I'm saying, "Two from the time of the pitch from the base you had to return to." I have to act as if he tagged up properly and leave it to the defense to appeal.

Now in your example, I admit that the runner did STOP and the defense overthrew 1ST, not 3d, an indication that they knew he hadn't tagged up. But it seems to me that (1) the important thing is that he was not RETURNING, (2) I shouldn't assume that his stop is an announcement that he knows he has to return to first but figures he has no chance, and (3) it doesn't matter which base they overthrow.

I sincerely hope this play never comes up in a game of mine.

I'm amazed at the controversy my question has caused, but at least now I feel that my confusion wasn't due to stupidity.

P.S. From now on, I will use appropriate punctuation in citing books. Thanks.

Greymule:

Listen to me now. A runner who leaves too soon is NOT like a runner who misses a base.

When a runner leaves too soon, he is off with the pitch. EVERYBODY already knows he left too soon when the fly is caught. That's why he turns around and tries to beat the throw back to the base he left too soon.

The rules say: Give him two bases from the time of the pitch. Now, since he's between second and third, in a FED game after he gets his award, all the defense has to do is appeal that he left first too soon.

Remember, he will go back to touch first, but it's all in vain in FED play, assuming the defense is even halfway attuned to the new appeal rule.

It's a routine play, and surely when some people get to work this morning, they will weigh in to back me up on this award.

[Roger Greene]

Graymule,

The rule is clear- two bases from time of the pitch.

I don't think you can infer from the rules or case plays that the direction the runner is moving was intended to affect the award.

You can not worry about what the proper base award does or does not make the defense aware of. Part of the reasoning behind requiring the defense to appeal is that the defense is expected to be aware of the rules and of the offense's actions on the base paths.

Re: Fed softball see 8-4-3g PENALTY "...and the award will be goverened by the position of the runners when the ball left the fielder's hand..." This matches your ASA ruling.

Roger Greene

[Bfair]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Carl Childress

FED 8-3-5b: "When a runner, who is returning to touch a base after a batted ball has been caught, is prevented from doing so because a thrown live ball has become dead, his award shall be from the base he occupied at the time of the pitch."

Now, here's a play:

R1 leaves early, touches second, nears third, and stops when he realizes the ball was caught and he has no chance to return safely to first. But the outfielder overthrows first, and the ball goes dead.

Are you telling the world that FED rules require the umpire to award R1 HOME PLATE?

The rule says "when a runner, who is returning"..........
Does your example have a runner returning.....NO.
Does this apply..............NO.
Your example shows a runner "who is required to return" and not a runner "who is returning".
Have you supplied any rule, ruling, or caseplay to the contrary.......NO

Childress, you stated 12/29/01 at eTeamz

Of course, it's necessary to infer intent on the part of batters, runners, and fielders, else we couldn't do our jobs. It's dangerous, as you show, to add that to our reading of the rules.
[my emphasis]

Now, we know what you believe is not written in the rules.
To accept what you say, one must read into the rules the Fed's intent.

So my question is..............
Which Childress do we listen to:

1. The one that says at eTeamz not to read things into the rules that aren't there, or
   
2. The one at eUmpire that reads into the rules the Fed means "a runner required to return" when, in fact, their words say a runner "who is returning"

Inquiring people want to know.................Lah, me.
You seem to be a victim of your own writings.......

Just my opinion,

Freix





[Edited by Bfair on Jan 21st, 2002 at 12:03 PM]

[greymule]

Papa C, you say, "When a runner leaves too soon, he is off with the pitch." Of course, he COULD be off with the pitch, and maybe everybody in the park knows he has to get back. But it's also leaving too soon if he goes back to tag at 1st and then leaves a split second before the catch, and maybe with everybody watching the center fielder, the ump is the only one who sees the infraction. Teams often neglect to appeal when the ump would have called an out. Do the rules differentiate between an obvious leaving too soon and a non-obvious one?

Should we all chip in and pay to have Kennedy, Breyer, Thomas, Scalia, Rehnquist, Souter, Ginsburg, Stevens, and O'Connor weigh in? I would predict another 5-4 ruling.