Can a retired runner be appealed?

[dash_riprock]

Related to the "missing the plate" sitch:

R1, R3, 2 out. Batter hits a ground ball to deep short. R1 rounds 2nd, but misses the bag. R1 continues toward 3rd but is tagged out by F6 for the 3rd out just after R3 scores legally (touches the plate). PU signals "score that run" on the time play. Can the defense appeal the miss at 2nd to take off the run (R1's out would be a force)? Can you appeal a runner who is already out?

[bob jenkins]

Yes, of course (in this situation).

[canadaump6]

This is the fourth out rule.

Edited to add: I'm right.

[dash_riprock]

Yes I know that, but the problem is R1 would be BOTH the 3rd and 4th outs. I'm not sure you can do that. The rules only speak of appealing a runner, not a retired runner.

[justanotherblue]

Absouletly on this one, the appeal would be upheld. No run.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

Yes I know that, but the problem is R1 would be BOTH the 3rd and 4th outs. I'm not sure you can do that. The rules only speak of appealing a runner, not a retired runner.

Yes, you can. J/R has a similar scenario and both it and JEA, I believe, word it as the fourth out, in essence, replacing and becoming the third out.

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

Yes I know that, but the problem is R1 would be BOTH the 3rd and 4th outs. I'm not sure you can do that. The rules only speak of appealing a runner, not a retired runner.

That's why they have ADVANTAGEOUS fourth out rules.

[dash_riprock]

Duh. The question is can the same guy be out twice.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by GarthB

Yes, you can. J/R has a similar scenario and both it and JEA, I believe, word it as the fourth out, in essence, replacing and becoming the third out.

Thank you.

[greymule]

In theory, a runner could be out four times. Abel on 3B, 2 outs. Baker hits a ball off the fence and is out at home for the third out. Defense appeals Baker's miss of 3B for the 4th out, his miss of 2B for the 5th out, and his miss of 1B for advantageous 6th out.

However, it may be that since the misses at 3B and 2B are not advantageous (they don't nullify the run), they would not be recognized. But I don't think that appealing a non-advantageous base would prevent an appeal at the advantageous one (1B in this case).

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by canadaump6

This is the fourth out rule.

Edited to add: I'm right.

Your first statement is correct, but not the answer to the question.

[canadaump6]

Situation very similar to OP, described in Jaksa/Roder:

"R3 and R1, two outs. The batter singles. R1 misses second and is thrown out at third for the third out. The defense's appeal is upheld at second: this is an advantageous fourth out and supersedes the out at third- R3 does not score". (Jaksa/Roder, page 86, example 2).