Rules Myths Part 1

[SAump]

In your own words, like you tied me up by the ankles too!

Originally Posted by BigSteve56

Go back to my response to dash riprock then tell me how my logic is wrong. Don't cite 8-2-8 either because it's not a valid argument against 8-4-1f. The two rules go hand in hand. 8-2-8 SUPPORTS 8-4-1f. Excuse me, I inadvertantly referenced 7-4-1f.

f. after a dropped third strike (see 8-4-1e) or a fair hit, if the ball held by any fielder touches the batter before the batter touches first base; or if any fielder, while holding the ball in his grasp, touches first base or touches first base with the ball before the batter-runner touches first base:

ART. 8... A runner acquires the right to the proper unoccupied base if he touches it before he is out.

Unless the ball beats the runner, the runner is NOT OUT. If he is NOT OUT, he has ACQUIRED the base. A "tie", "dead heat", "simultaneous" or any other word you want to use indicates that there is NO OUT because the defense has not fulfilled the obligation of getting he ball to the base BEFORE the runner has touched the base.

Put the two rules together and tell me how my logic is wrong, using the context of the rule book. Don't just say it's wrong, cite the rules as they are written.

The only thing I've stated is that there can be a tie, a statistical time frame, from which an umpire cannot determine with any certainty which event occurred first -the runner or the ball reaching the base, and that any determination is a "guess" as Tim C alluded to. I agree 100%. I've never questioned that. My whole position is based on accepting the idea that theoretically there can be a "tie", and if so, 8-4-1f is invoked and the runner is NOT OUT. If 8-4-1f is invoked and the runner is NOT OUT, then he has ACQUIRED THE BASE under 8-2-8.

SAump says 8-2-8 is the source of my faulty logic. You made the statement - tell me how, given what I have stated above within the context of the rules book, that my logic is wrong.

There are only 3 statements that come into this scenario -

1. A tie is possible, within the statistical time frame as stated.
2. 8-4-1f
3. 8-2-8

Given that, prove to me that a runner in a "tie" situation is in fact out.

Again, don't cite what some umpire told you, or what you heard in a discussion. We are dealing with a 100% straight observance of the rule as it is written.
If you can't do it, then either admit it and suck up a little pride, or just don't respond. I've put a challenge out there and I'll takes my lumps if anyone can prove me wrong. What I don't deserve is a bunch of troll comments. This is supposed to be a forum for discussion. I've taken a position I believe in, not out of pride, arrogance, or any other false pretense, but because I believe it to be the right position. I've opened myself up to ridicule from all of you.

Umpires are supposed to have integrity. Think about it before you attack.

Is there an F across my forehead or something?
What part of before and after didn't you understand? Ties!
Would you like me to repeat the part you left out? Ties!
WTHAYTA? Ties! Thank God for the ability to cut and paste.

No one said ties do not exist. They said the "tie goes to the runner myth" does not exists. Is there room left for judgement?
As you stated, the ball did not arrive before the runner. So did the ball arrive after the runner? You stated there was no tie in the rulebook. Please explain why you incorrectly ruled that the runner was safe every single time? The best you can hope for is "I can't decide, it was a tie, so bat again." That doesn't even pass for minority opinion.

You fail to allow room for judgment in your hypothetical sitch. If umpire judgment were allowed, a tie would always result in a safe OR an out. Ruling every tie goes to the runner would be about as impartial as the unwritten myth. Fortunately, I know the difference between discrimination and favoritism. Obviously, you don't discriminate against the defense. Great. You favor the offense. Great. I am glad your doing such a great job on the diamond. Lucky for me, everyone else I know allows for umpire judgment to be utilized on the real diamond.

BTW, coincidence, first play of the game today a real whacker. Both B/R and 1B came down on the bag a nearly the same time. I ruled in favor of the defense. Later in the same ball game, a real whacker. Both B/R and 1B came down on the bag a exactly the same time. I wish you.tube had a video of the expression that flashed across my face. After I blew out a huge breath and felt my eyes roll up the back of my head, I simply held a wimpy fist up to say the B/r was ruled out. I looked at the base coach in disbelief of what I may have witnessed for I was only hoping one had beaten the other, and told him that play was closer than the other. I didn't hear any complaints and he agreed with how hard my decision must have been.

Now, I encourage you to give the tie to the baserunner a test for the rest of the season and get back to us when you meet a coach who doesn't bye your conclusion. I would love to read the ejection report. On the other hand, I hear t-ball coaches are pretty forgiving. So track the score of every ballgame and report back when you have one with less than ten runs/game. I would love to hear your thoughts about the defensive effort for that game. Ta-ta.