The Official Forum - Contradiction?

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Baseball (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/)

- - Contradiction? (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/4316-contradiction.html)

Quote:

Originally posted by greymule
I think I've got it! Now I'm looking forward to calling the following play:

One out. R1 on 3B, R2 on 1B. R2, a very fast runner, is off with the pitch. B3, a slow runner, hits a high chop over the mound. R1 sprints for home. F6 sees no play except the easy one at 1B and so takes his time to make sure of the out. R2 rounds second but misses the bag. F6 throws to 1B to retire B3. R2 runs to 3B. The throw from F3 to F5 is too late to get R2, but as R2 is standing on the bag, F5 nonchalantly tags him anyway.

The key here is of course that at the time R2 missed 2B, the force was still on. The out had not yet been recorded at 1B.

"OK, R2, you're out on the accidental-force-appeal-whatever-it-is, and R1, your run doesn't count."

I can hardly wait!

Well, if I was your UIC, I could hardly wait also.

You have one out during action (B1 at first) and one out ON APPEAL. Right?

Now, which out came first?

B1.

Whenever a following runner is out during continuing action, that removes the force on....

Well, I'm sure you can figure out the rest of that sentence.

Mule: See? They actually do study these situations, the FED committee. It all hangs together, doesn't it?

I await your next attempt. (grin)

Carl:

Isn't 9.1.1H continuing action?

And in the play I just described, if the out at first base removes the force on R2 even though THE FORCE WAS IN EFFECT AT THE TIME HE MISSED THE BAG, which I have framed on my wall next to the Ten Commandments, then R2 is not even out at 3B unless and until the defense appeals.

May the force be with you.

Carl, Greymule, Roger Green, Bob Jenkins, Freix and Sam C:

WOW! I think you gentlemen sqeezed every ounce out of that hypothetical situation. I know some lawyers, socially not profesionally, that couldn't begin to comprehend the substance nor the merits of this explanation. While I understand that which was (is) being discussed (disputed), and accept it as possible, I also believe that it's nearly a "one in a million" on the probability scale.

I think I now know why there are so many umpires who would choose to assume the position that they didn't see any of those R-1's R-2's R-3's B-3's etc. miss any bags whatsoever. (the lessor of 2 evils)

It certainly appears to be a little confusing to the veteran umpires. The ability to analyze and sort out the specifics (who - what - where - when - how), I'm afraid, would require, at a minimum, brain power that far exceeds that of the average and even the advanced umpire. When, and if, this play does surface again, during a contest, it would be worth TAKING THE TIME TO SORT IT OUT .... One would be automatically enrolled in MENSA (sp)!

Please let me know when you guys start a discussion regarding the "DH" rule in college play (NCAA 7-2), I need to order a 6-pack and a couple of pizza's before hand.

Walt Whitman was correct ... "The game of ball is glorious!"

[Edited by etbaseball on Mar 8th, 2002 at 01:21 PM]