Do you allow the appeal?

[justanotherblue]

I've been doing a fair amount of reading/research here the last couple days. I'm beginning to feel that yes, the runner may return, and in the OP, the runner can retouch and be protected. That said, I also feel that had the runner immediatly attempted to return, he would keep the timing play alive and no run would score. The difference being, he crosses the plate, stops, sees the out on the BR, comes back and touches, instead of missing the plate, immediatly returns and just misses touching before the out at 2B.

That sound about fair to most?

[dash_riprock]

The time play was crossing the plate before the 3rd out. There was no other time play. You can't "keep a time play alive." Touching the plate was correcting a baserunning error at a base that R2 had already achieved. All the touch did was prevent a successful appeal. If there were no re-touch, a successful appeal would result in the advantageous 4th out and wipe off the run.

[D-Man]

The more I think about this play, the less likely I feel it can occur. Runner crosses plate, third out happens and runner comes back to touch home. This touch needs to happen before the infielders leave the diamond. Certainly could happen but not likely. The defense moving off the field is a key element here because if the touch doesn't occur before they are all off, the touch would mean nothing (run would count because the miss wasn't appealed in time) because at some point the half inning has to be considered over. So we are concentrating on the window of time between when the third out is recorded and when the D has left the infield.

In Fed. the runner, after missing home, must return immediately. Immediately is user defined and IMO if he does not (and how could he not within this window of time) his attempt to correct his mistake would be meaningless and it would tip off the defense that they could appeal (of course it could also fool them into thinking they could no longer appeal). The other codes do not make this immediate return a requirement. The touch would still need to occur within this window of time (which as I said would probably need to be considered immediate anyway).

All that being said, I would call it a timing play when the runner reutrned to touch, no run. If the call is protested we've got rules support. You've got to touch the bases. Interpretation-wise we can argue that a touch trumps a pass. All benefit of doubt on a missed base play should go to the defense and all burden of fulfilling the requirments of the baserunning rules should fall on the offense.

D

[jicecone]

IMO the timing play ends at the moment the runner either tags the plate or misses the plate, as by rule.

The retouch by the runner is to correct the base running error of not tagging the base, also by rule.

The appeal, also allowed by rule, was not necessary after the tag because the base running infraction was corrected.

Scoring however, is achieved upon the touch of the plate or as otherwise allowed. IMO touch of the plate for scoring and touch of the plate for a timimg play do NOT have to be the same instance in time.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by jicecone

OBR 4.09a "Here is a general statement that covers:
When a runner misses a base and a fielder holds the ball on a missed base, or on the base originally occupied by the runner if a fly ball is caught, and appeals for the umpire’s decision, the runner is out when the umpire sustains the appeal; all runners may score if possible, except that with two out the runner is out at the moment he misses the bag, if an appeal is sustained as applied to the following runners."

OBR Rule 7.10 Comment: If two runners arrive at home base about the same time and the first runner misses home plate but a second runner legally touches the plate, the runner is tagged out on his attempt to come back and touch the base or is called out, on appeal, then he shall be considered as having been put out before the second runner scored and being the third out. Second runner’s run shall not count, as provided in Rule 7.12."

I am open for correction but, don't both of these imply (maybe not clearly), that the time the out is registered is considered to be at the time of the miss of the bases.

So in the case of a timing play does this not define the moment we are using as a consideration point here. If the runner is out at the time of the miss, then unless otherwise indicated he is also safe at that moment too. Although the officiall will not indicate this untill the runner has officially satisfy the requirement to touch the base or as otherwise allowed in the rules.

IMO I have (A), the runner as safe here for the play indicated in the first thread.

Makes sense to me, except the 4th paragraph, last sentence (my emphasis): I think PU must indicate "score the run" on the time play when the runner crosses the plate (subject to being called out on proper appeal until the miss is corrected). Otherwise, he alerts the defense to the miss of the plate.

[Dave Reed]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

Makes sense to me, except the 4th paragraph, last sentence (my emphasis): I think PU must indicate "score the run" on the time play when the runner crosses the plate (subject to being called out on proper appeal until the miss is corrected). Otherwise, he alerts the defense to the miss of the plate.

First, I remember Rock Hudson and Rip Torn, but where did the writers get "dash" from?

Secondly, the above quote seems a bit like a blanket statement. I believe the correct mechanic depends on the situation. If the runner missing home is forced, PU should signal safe if he beat the throw. If there is a tag attempt, and the tag is missed, then PU should make no signal. I don't know what an umpire should signal if there is no play on the runner.

Regarding a missed base and tag, the PBUC manual says in 3.3:
"Should a runner in scoring fail to touch home plate and continues on his way to the bench, he may be put out by a fielder touching home plate and appealing to the umpire for a decision. However, this rule only applies where a runner is on his way to the bench and the catcher would be required to chase him. It does not apply to the ordinary play whre the runner misses the plate and then immediately makes an effort to touch the plate before being tagged. In that case, the runner must be tagged.
On the play at the plate, should the runner miss home plate and the fielder miss the tag on the runner, the umpire shall make no signal on the play. As outlined in the previous paragraph, the runner must then be tagged if he attempts to return to the plate; if he continoues on his way to the bench, the defense may make an appeal."

[edit to remove some nonsense]

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by Dave Reed

First, I remember Rock Hudson and Rip Torn, but where did the writers get "dash" from?

I don't know, but Garth probably does.

Originally Posted by Dave Reed

On the play at the plate, should the runner miss home plate and the fielder miss the tag on the runner, the umpire shall make no signal on the play.

[edit to remove some nonsense]

The PBUC manual does not contemplate a time play in this example. "Score that run" is not a signal on the miss or tag, only an indication that the acquiring of the plate occurred before the 3rd out at 2nd base.

[justanotherblue]

Does anybody know anyone currently attending JEAPU?? Lets get Jim's view on this one!

[D-Man]

Wendelstadt has and interesting view. Check out their message board.

D

[Four-Oh]

Hi, all.

Indeed, in the J/R, it does state that the run should be disallowed:

("the time he [the runner] is considered to have touched the plate is when he actually does touch it") J/R 9th ed., pp. 81-82.

Italics original, denoting that such text is "not to be considered those officially used on the fields of professional baseball" (from the Preface, p. 17)

However, in Roder's book "More than 100 Problems with the Official Baseball Rules" (2nd ed.), in Problem 8 (pp. 15-17), Roder notes, at the end of his discussion of the play that:

"PBUC is on record (BRD 454) stating that the run in the examples[*] must be allowed."

This, I think, gives us an indication as to how this play should be called, although Roder does go on to say:

"It is anyone's guess what a professional umpire might rule on these plays"

which, looking at the length of this discussion, wouldn't surprise me in the least!

While I originally liked J/R's concept of this play and a literal interpretation of 4.09(a), I'm not sure it squares with the other J/R concept of "touch or pass of a base" (J/R, 9th ed., p.43). It seems to me that the PBUC (although I only know of it from the quotation above) and the JEA (posted earlier) rulings are the way to treat this play.

Regards,
Andrew

*The examples in question are:
1. 2 out, R1, extra-base hit, R1 passes home, B-R then out at 3B, R1 returns and touches plate before tag, PU signals R1 safe, but defensive manager argues that R1's run scored after the third out, and
2. 2 out, R2, base hit, R2 passes home, B-R then out at 2B, PU indicates run scores on time play, R2 then returns and touches plate, no appeal (defense leaves field).

[Publius]

Originally Posted by D-Man

Wendelstadt has and interesting view. Check out their message board.

D

The Wendelstedt RAMM, in Reference Play 14 of "How a Run Scores" (p. 99), agrees with Roder. It is a contradiction of "Harry's Hint" on p. 94: "Missed bases should be considered as "touched" for scoring purposes, until they are appealed by the defensive team." (emphasis mine)

By ruling a runner did not touch, even though he passed, the base, the umpire has, in effect, initiated an appeal on behalf of the defense. He'll have to go wash his hands before resuming play.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Publius

By ruling a runner did not touch, even though he passed, the base, the umpire has, in effect, initiated an appeal on behalf of the defense.

Tosh. You persist in ignoring the fact that the runner touched the plate after the third out was made. No appeal necessary on a timing play.

By scoring the run, the umpire has, in effect, cheated by denying the timing play. He'll have to go wash his hands before resuming play.

(Simply ignoring the opposing viewpoint, or shouting your viewpoint louder and in ever more insulting terms, is no way to win an argument.)

[JJ]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

The time play was crossing the plate before the 3rd out. There was no other time play. You can't "keep a time play alive." Touching the plate was correcting a baserunning error at a base that R2 had already achieved. All the touch did was prevent a successful appeal. If there were no re-touch, a successful appeal would result in the advantageous 4th out and wipe off the run.

I'm with Dash on this one. Since the "authorities" seem to be in disagreement, I'm free to choose (and then let the supervisors rule when the protest happens). But that's just me.

JJ

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by JJ

I'm with Dash on this one. Since the "authorities" seem to be in disagreement, I'm free to choose (and then let the supervisors rule when the protest happens).

JJ

And, of course, the decision could very well depend on whether it's a day game or a night game.

[justanotherblue]

Just as you can have a different ruling on backswing interference, after reading and discussing this play with others, I believe you can have two differnt rulings.

If the runner aggressively returns during unrelaxed action, the time play is/should be in effect IHMO. If the runner over runs the plate, comes to a stop, and as long as he doens't enter the dugout, he may return and protect himself against the appeal by touching the plate, during relaxed action.

As it has been pointed out, there really isn't a correct answer to this one, the rules simply don't discuss or cover this play. So not only does it come down to being a day or night game, is it east or west coast, and north or south. Were all have to agree to dis-agree on this one. And may the first portest win.