Tag or no?
 

Runner misses first, ball arrives, runner is diving back to first. Can the fielder step on the base and appeal or is this now a tag play.

Illini Ref,

With the runner scrambling back to the base, the fielder is required to tag him in order to obtain the out.

JM

disagree. that's only true for a play at the plate. 7.10(b) a runner is out on appeal when: with the ball in play, while advancing or returning to a base, he fails to touch each base in order before he, or a missed base, is tagged.

Wrong.

This is unrelaxed action. As such, the runner must be tagged.

bobby,

My "source" for the assertion that the runner must be tagged in this situation is the J/R discussion of missed base appeals of first when action is "unrelaxed", using J/R terminology.

From example play 2:

JM

Coach...doesn’t that apply to 2nd and 3rd only. An appeal play at 1st and home can be made when action is relaxed or unrelaxed. Therefore the fielder can hold the ball at 1st or home and properly appeal when the runner misses the bag even as he scrambles back to the bag. 2nd or 3rd would be relaxed only.

Forest,

I don't believe so. In regard to Home, the MLBUM is quite explicit that if the runner is attempting to return to home (rather than heading to the dugout) he must be tagged for a properly constituted appeal:

J/R is the only source that I have found that specifically addresses Illini_Ref's posed sitch (B/R scrambling back to 1B after missing it) and it is quite specific in stating that the runner (not the base) must be tagged in order to uphold the appeal.

Since I can't find anything that contradicts this interpretation, and the logic strikes me as similar to that in the MLBUM regarding a runner missing home, I'm inclined to accept the interpretation as valid.

JM

Fed. and NCAA clearly states you can tag the base for the appeal.
Fed. pg.49 art.5 &penalty
ncaa pg. 97 rule 6 a 3
and im sure pro would not make you tag a runner on a force play!!!
you would simply smile at the umpire step on the base with the baseball in hand and state he missed the base mr umpire sir. and your response would be, why yes young man you are correct and the idiot is out!!!

this is an appeal on a missed force play

What rules?

thinking about arguing this makes my head hurt.

That play occurred right in from of me a few years ago at a Phillies' game. B1 beat the throw but missed the bag and overran down the RF line. Safe. F3 then stepped on 1B and held the ball up for the umpire to see. (I couldn't tell for certain if F3 actually said anything.) No call. F3 wiggled the ball to get the ump's attention again. No call. F3 tagged the runner returning to 1B. Out.

The way have understood it for a long time, if the runner is in the vicinity and returning, it's a tag play.

I'm pretty sure FED has a pretty brainless appeal rule...way different from FED...the one above is correct for OBR...to be safe...just don't make a call until the kid tags him...not many will simply stand there with their foot on 1B and not do anything else if no call is made.

Relaxed, unrelaxed, I hate these terms, leaves to much chance of missing those outs we so dearly desire.

From J/R: For assistance in defining and identifying appeals, action is described herein as "relaxed" or "unrelaxed." In relaxed action the runner (whose action is being appealed) is inactive; he is standing on another base, or is well removed from the base at which the appeal is being made. In unrelaxed action the runner (whose action is being appealed) is trying to scramble to a base and the ball is in, or approaching, the vicinity.

Anytime I read something that says "for assistance in defining and identifying" that's all I'll use it for, assistance, not gospel, etched in stone fact.

EXAMPLES (from J/R)
Ex: 1. Missed base appeal of 1st (overrun) or home, relaxed action: A runner is advancing to first or home and runs by the base, missing it, and continues running for several steps, ignoring the fact that he missed the base. The fielder, now in possession of the ball, shows the ball to the umpire and steps on the base, claiming the runner missed it: action is relaxed, so this is an appeal, and the runner is out.

My question/concern/comment; I would not deny this appeal of touching the base, even when the runner from "several steps beyond" or "well removed", suddenly realizes, is told by coach or teammate, to touch. Though the runner would indeed be attempting to scramble back. He missed it, it was appealed, out.

I would not make the catcher; 1. chase the runner nor 2. await his arrival to be tagged. For example; if the appeal by touching the base is recognized and F2 is now able to catch say the BR going into 2nd, hey, that's 2 good things. If I deny this appeal, F2 say's huh, and delays his throw to retire the BR at 2nd, I've just put the screws to the D twice, and rewarded the O for their mistake, uh, uh, not on my watch..

So what is relaxed really? I gotta say, if the runner is doing anything other than scrambling back (returning to touch) "and" has a chance to touch before, either an appeal or a tag can be applied, that's unrelaxed. If the runner has not yet come to a stop (non-slide) after overrunnning, I'd say he's not "returning" and allow the appeal, regardless of what the runners intentions are. Ex. F2 pukes up a throw from F8 in an attempt to retire the scoring runner, the ball rolls towards the mound 8', F2 secures the ball and wheels back for a tag attempt on the runner, the tag misses the runner who missed the plate as he passed it at full tilt. As the runner now several steps beyond is attempting to stop his momentum and return, F2 steps on the plate and say's "he missed it sir". Ring him up IMO, especially if it's a sincere "Sir."

How far do we go? What is several steps beyond or well removed, are these super tiny baby steps or long Impala strides? What is several, more than 1, 5, 10? What is "well removed?" If the D has time to step on and state the appeal, in a relaxed fashion, I'd say that's well removed.

J/R Example: (chopped short a bit.)
Ground ball to SS, BR beats the throw to F3, is past 1B and has missed the base, the umpire signals safe and the F3 steps on the base and appeals to the umpire that the BR failed to touch first. The BR is out on the appeal.

This ex. has no comment on what the BR is doing, he's probably not even stopped his momentum yet, or even if he has, he's probably several steps beyond, so the D would have to wait or chase, for the tag. Meanwhile R2 is rounding 3rd and threatning to score, I won't make the D wait, nor chase, and possibly allow the runner from 3rd to score.

In closing (yeah I know, finally) I'd go as far as saying that the only time action is unrelaxed is:
Rule 7.08(k) Comment: It does not apply to the ordinary play where the runner misses the plate and then immediately makes an effort to touch the plate before being tagged. In that case, runner must be tagged.

This is what I can relate too. F2 missed the tag, R missed the plate, they both know and are trying to correct their mistakes. But, should the runner in an attempt to avoid the ensuing tag, take a step other than back to the plate, or from our fellow "Wrestling officials" fail to move forward, in a stalling tactic, I'd allow the appeal, as I can construe these manuevers as not "returning"....

JM:

What we have here may be an example of how the J/R is use in internet debates far more than it is in the real world of professional baseball.

In fact, while TC can better attest to the higher MiLB levels, umpires at the Single A level are discouraged from...no that's not strong enough...actually told not to consult rule books or interpretive manuals other than the OBR and PBUC's.

FED and OBR seem to be quite different. FED explicitly addresses this question, and they want the out called. If BR misses the base, and F3 subsequently has the ball and steps on the base, BR is out. F3 does not even have to make an unmistakable appeal (need not say, "he missed the base" for example).

For OBR, it's less clear. The rationale for J/R's position makes sense to me.
1. A runner acquires a base when he passes it, whether or not he touches it.
2. BR may overrun 1B.
3. To allow F3 to appeal the missed base by tagging the base seems to defeat the purpose of (2).
4. On the other hand, some appeal must be allowed - the BR who misses 1B has committed a base-running error.
5. Tagging the BR if he's trying to return seems to be a good compromise.
6. If BR is not trying to return, the fielder need not chase him, just tag the base.

Notice that the terms "relaxed action" and "un-relaxed action" are not essential to this reasoning.

Well, the above post, pretty much wraps it up for me. I've seen all I need to read about this one. Nice post mbyron!

i look at it this way, slow roller too short, runner beats throw by a half-step but misses first, if all that is needed to get an out was touching first, then, as long as F3 maintained contact with the base, and had clean control of the ball, would you not then be forced to call the runner out? BR needs to be tagged.


steve

The appeal must be obvious, in your sit. I signal safe and say "no he didn't" attempt, nor fake, to second. D has to tell ya what their doing.

Or any other baseball, all of the rd party rules interpretave junk books out there. They are for philosophical discussions, pointers, that sorta thing.

OBR yes they do, but not in FED. See 8.2.3, which has BR out after F3 "casually steps on first base, though he believes the runner has beaten the throw."

How FED knows what F3 believes is another matter...

Perhaps you were still out of the country at the time, but FED eliminated the accidental appeal. They failed to clean up the case book, however. They sent memos out to ignore 8.2.3 I don't know why it's still there.

I was aware of eliminating the accidental appeal. The existence of the memo would be decisive, of course.

I found 8.2.3 most recently in the 2008 "Rules by Topic" that NFHS publishes. Weird that this edited treatment of the rules would still have a banished case play.

I'll stop posting that FED wants an out here. :o

yep, had a brain lock there, came too me in the middle of the day, had forgotten about the change, thanks for not being too harsh on me.

steve

Doesnt to me.

When does he pss it? When he passes some parallel line between 1B and 2B? Or the legal 3' margin of same? What about the "run box", is it considerd here?

Has he? He acquired it.

"Return" as in snail moving in the general direction of the acquired base that he missed? Can he overrun it again and start the sequence all over?

Forgetting the fact that you've missed the "new" FED interps, noneof this is reasonable.

Set aside whether it was an accidental appeal or not. The out was given by stepping on the bag, no tag was required.

"B1 is out. Because a force play is being made on the runner and is the result of continuing action, F3 is required to appeal the missed base and does so by stepping on the missed base."

You can't set aside the issue of an accidental appeal -- that's the whole point of this case, and why FED seems to have in some sense set it aside.

But you're not going to simply signal out when the defense has no clue that they're appealing...remember when the old FED appeal required no action by the defense...the umpire simply called it on a missed base? That wasn't too long ago...

There's stepping on the missed base and there's stepping on the missed base. When it's down with obvioius intent to appeal, ring up the out, when the field trips over it or just touches it as he passing by...that's not an appeal in FED...anymore.

Garth -

Is that memo on the NFHS website? Thanks.

Either may be tagged.
 

The rulebook clearly states that either the base or the runner may be tagged in order to be put out. The only restriction noted is that the ball must be alive. The interpretation you cite originally came from Nick Bremigan (RIP). He transfered the requirement to tag the runner at home plate when he is in the immediate vicinity and returning, to every other base. Unfortunately, this is not the opinion of most professional umpires. There is no relaxed vs. unrelaxed action noted anywhere. This shows the problem with umpires taking a specific area of the rules, and applying them to other areas of the field. This often occurs with plays where contact occurs with a runner and fielder, both just doing there job. Specifically addressed for the area around home plate, the fictitious "tangle/untangle" ruling has been applied way too often on the field in situations where interference or obstruction should be called.
Both of these situations are specifically addressed in the Wendelstedt Rules and Mechanics Manual; recently updated for 2008.

Again, we see the difference between the theory of J/R and practice of professional umpires. It is no wonder PBUC instructs its new umpires to refrain from consulting interpretive manuals other than its own.

Hunter,

Similarly, the rule book clearly states that when a runner misses home plate, only the BASE need be tagged (Ref. OBR 7.10(d) ). Yet, in the MLBUM, there is explicit discussion that, if the runner is returning to attempt to touch the missed base, HE, rather than the base, must be tagged in order for the defense to obtain an out. Now your assertion that Nick transferred the 7.10(d) principle to 7.10(b) makes sense to me. Why it is improper to do so eludes me.

Well, I guess I'd have to take your word on that point.

I have to disagree. While it does not employ the terms "relaxed" and "unrelaxed", the MLBUM discussion of 7.10(d) is unquestionably EMPLOYING the concepts behind those terms as defined in J/R in defining the proper way to rule.

How?

To me, an entirely different set of circumstances & I'm not sure what misconception you are referring to.

OK. Why is it that most MLB umpires disagree with the J/R interpretation on the original question posed in this thread?

JM

Or more precisely, on what authoritative basis do they do so? Please don't say the absence of terminology in the rulebook: that's the cause of the problem, not the solution.

Does that mean they are discouraged from reading J/R. JEA , and MLBUM (which I suppose isn't issued by the PBUC)?

Re: Memo 8.2.3
 

I've tried searching with no luck. Help.

Thanks.

Yes. And PBUC readily admits that the rules under which Professional Baseball leagues, (MiLB), occasionally differ from those underwhich MLB plays. The most recent examples would be the batter's "one-foot-in-the-box" rule that the MiLB enforces and the new timing rule for pitchers to pitch after receiving the ball.

The new pitching regulation has even more selective enforcement...it was assigned to implemented in two minor leagues only, the short season NWL and Penn-York.

technically speaking don't you have to work MLB to get a hold of the manaul so we rely on the PBUC or other interpretive manual to rule the majority of our games...other than the pros on here??

What I was taught was the following.

Once the BR has crossed 1B, even if the base is NOT touched, the umpire MUST signal SAFE, even if F3 subsequently catches the throw while maintaining contact with 1B. The onus is on the defense to recognize that the base has been missed and properly appeal.

:confused: He's not Safe, why signal it?

Now he's out.

Appeal what? You called him safe. :D

PBUC sells their stuff
http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/m...c=_ump_manuals

Good and let it rot in Hell there.

On an attempted steal of 2B, the runner tries to avoid the tag by thrusting his body wide of the bag and grabbing the base with his hands. However, as F6 misses the swipe tag, the runner slides completely past the base without touching it. With the runner's feet pointing toward left field, his outstretched hands are a foot past 2B, reaching back for the bag.

F6 has his foot on 2B and sees that the runner is off and trying to scramble back. Instead of tagging the runner, he appeals to the umpire that the runner missed the bag as F6 proceeds to get ahold of the base.

Strictly according to the book, we honor the appeal. But in this situation, we don't.

you are correct...but look at the url....that manual is not the MLB umpire manual...that is the minor league manual...hence the url...minorleaguebaseball.com

My bad, we have the PBUC and the MLB changes tagged to them. I forgot the difference. As to the MLB stuff, it doesn't appear to be hard to get if a walking moron like Interested Ump can get them. :D

Running...........>>>>

Originally Posted by fitump56

As to the MLB stuff, it doesn't appear to be hard to get if a walking moron like Interested Ump can get them.

The Deej is angry with me because I cashed his welfare check and gave it to the GOP. :p

Not true, by most (all?) accepted interpretations.

I do agree, however that the umpire should only signal safe if the play is close enough that he'd signal safe had the runner touched the bag. That is, the umpire should act just as he would if the runner had touched the bag -- whether a "strong" safe, a "nonchalant" safe or no signal, dependign on the closeness of the play.