Continuing action

[greymule]

I think that some of my difficulty with certain case book plays is a result of not understanding this term. Exactly what does "continuing action" mean?

Fed case book 8.2.3: B1 hits a slow roller to F5 and arrives safely but misses first base. F3 catches the ball and casually steps on first base, though he believes the runner has beaten the throw. Ruling: B1 is out. Because a force play is being made on the runner and is the result of CONTINUING ACTION [my emphasis], F3 is not required to appeal the missed base and needs only to complete the force out.

We have already discussed the infamous Situation 19 where the runner who missed second on a force play is "accidentally" tagged out after arriving safely at third. That also must be considered continuing action.

If B1 hits a ball off the fence, misses first base, and is safe at home because the catcher's tag is late, would B1 still be out on that accidental force play appeal? Or does something to do with continuing action negate that out?

If the catcher had handed B1 the ball as a souvenir for his inside-the-park home run and in doing so "tagged" B1, would B1 still be out?

Can anyone give me a play where there's NOT continuing action? How about a play in which the lack of continuing action would negate the "accidental appeal" on a force?

[bob jenkins]

It's not defined, but you can get some idea from 2-29. I wouldn't be too strict on the "pitcher holding the ball in the pitching position" part of it.

As someone else says, the rules are a finite set of criteria to be applied to an infinite set of possibilities. Learn to read them with the proper balance of literalness and figurativeness.

[greymule]

Balancing the literal and the figurative, deciding when common sense overrides the book, adjusting the rules to the level of play. The art of umpiring. Maybe also ignoring rules that nobody knows about and that will just cause trouble.

Maybe it's better to posit an obvious break in continuing action and work backward from there:

R1 on 1B. B2 gets a base hit. R2 misses 2B and reaches 3B safely. Nobody calls time, and F6 throws the ball back to F1. B2 now takes off for 2B, F1 throws to F6, who puts his glove down on the forward edge of 2B as B2 slides into the glove and is put out. I assume that the throw back to F1 broke the continuing action and negated the accidental appeal otherwise created when F6 put his glove on 2B.

Or is that a double play?

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by greymule
Balancing the literal and the figurative, deciding when common sense overrides the book, adjusting the rules to the level of play. The art of umpiring. Maybe also ignoring rules that nobody knows about and that will just cause trouble.

Maybe it's better to posit an obvious break in continuing action and work backward from there:

R1 on 1B. B2 gets a base hit. R2 misses 2B and reaches 3B safely. Nobody calls time, and F6 throws the ball back to F1. B2 now takes off for 2B, F1 throws to F6, who puts his glove down on the forward edge of 2B as B2 slides into the glove and is put out. I assume that the throw back to F1 broke the continuing action and negated the accidental appeal otherwise created when F6 put his glove on 2B.

Or is that a double play?

Mule:

In debate there's a technique called reductio ad absurdem (reduce to the absurd). You're a master at that.

The FED is quite clear: Any tag of a runner who has missed a force base results in an out. Surely they will change that for next year. Plays like yours at the plate ought to prove rather beneficial to them when they consider altering their stance.

I have forwarded your most recent "monstrosity" to the appropriate authorities.

BTW: Kyle McNeely, advisor to the committee, has an article for Monday's eUmpire.com, in which he addresses the issues you have just broached.

Read it, and you'll feel better about everything.

[w_sohl]

I am assuming that it isn't a double play until the actual appeal now occurs. Is that what I am getting from your response Carl?