In 1964, I attended a game in which the Orioles, in one inning, got 4 singles and 1 triple off Yankee pitching but scored only 1 run. An old baseball book of mine gave an example of an inning in which a team could get 2 triples, 1 double, and 3 singles and still not score. However . . .

How about 3 singles, 1 triple, and 6 walks——AND NOBODY LEFT ON——but no runs?

In Fed, missed bases on force plays can result in accidental live-ball appeals. Intentional walks do not end the right to appeal, nor do intervening plays. Umpires must recognize that a fourth out can nullify a run. Therefore, in the spirit of reductio ad absurdum:

PLAY: After they hit singles, R1 is on 3B, R2 on 2B, R3 on 1B, with 0 out. B4 triples, driving in R1, R2, and R3, but R2 misses 3B. Coach orders B5 and B6 intentionally walked. F1 picks off B5 at 2B and B6 at 1B. Coach orders B7 and B8 intentionally walked. F1 tries to pick off B8 at 1B but throws ball away. B4 and B7 score, B8 goes to 3B. Coach orders B9 and B10 (originally R1) walked intentionally. F1 tries to pick off B9 at 2B but ball gets away. B8 and B9 score, B10 is trapped in a rundown between 3B and 2B and is tagged out by F5, who then falls backward and sits on 3B. RULING: Umpire rules R2 out on accidental appeal (fourth out) and the runs of R1, R2, R3, B4, B7, B8, and B9 do not count.

It could happen.

I guess B4 would lose his triple, though.

Wouldn't R1's run count since he could have scored before R2 missed third base? So then only one run would count?

R2's out was a force out.

(BTW, greymule -- the standard on these board is to use the runner number as the base they are starting the play at -- e.g. r3 at third, r2 at second, 1 at first. We don't usually use the FED notation. Most even change it when they are quoting FED plays.)

I Dare You...
 

IF this ever happened and IF you are the umpire at the game, I DARE YOU to make that call. You would need to join the Federal Witness Protection Program and I can assure you that the Fed's would ban you from further officiating positions.

Re: I Dare You...
 

Why do you dare us to make that call. If it is the right call it should be made every time that it happens. Your comment makes it sound as if you might be a coach.

If I'm going to be in the witness protection program, I'll have to be careful to distinguish between the Feds and the Fed.

Monday night the NJ interpreter reminded everyone that it is not our prerogative to ignore rules we don't like. However, as regards mechanics on an accidental appeal if a batter hits a bases-loaded triple with 2 out, misses first, slides into 3B safe and is then casually tagged by F5:

1. BU follows the batter to 3B and calls safe.
2. PU calls batter out on accidental appeal and disallows the 3 runs.
3. BU and PU race to getaway car and attempt to beat the mob out of town.

That's my point...
 

First, I'm not a coach. I am an umpire but my credentials are not important.

Honestly, that call would take brass ones (although you wouldn't have them for long after the call).

I absolutely agree that we should enforce all of the rules, like them or not. However, if I'm going to call this one, R2 had better have missed third base by a lot --- if I'm the only one who saw it, I'm not giving the accidental appeal. Frankly, the action of falling onto the base is probably not understood to be an accidental appeal by 99% of the people involved in the game.

So, in the words of many before me, "Don't go looking for boogers."

And this "play" proves....

just pray that it doesnt happen

Mr. Mule, You got too much time on your hands!!!

In the middle of all this mess, didn't the accidental appeal go away this year?

No. (unfortunately) See 2-29-3

Roger Greene

2-29-3 is a force play at second. He crossed second then crossed back because he thought it might be caught. It wasn't and then it's a straight force out at second.

It would also apply if a runner misses a base he if forced to and advances to the next base, or if the batter runner misses first. Read it again and go to the NHFS baseball rules interpertations. See situations 18, 19 and 20 (I think).

There are also extensive discussions of the accidential appeal in earlier threads.

Roger Greene

OK I believe I am semi wrong. I think it was stated that it was still there for a missed force out but not any other appeal. I will investigate and if I find out differently I'll post back. Thanks for reminding me.

I disagree with "accidental" appeals
 

Going back to greymule's original scenario, I would have to disagree with his "theory" of an "accidental" appeal. In 8-2 Penalty it is clearly stated that on a fourth-out appeal, "an appeal may be made after the third out as long as it is made properly and the resulting appeal is an apparent fourth out". There is no doubt the the "resulting appeal" in this situation is an apparent fourth out, so we now must prove that the appeal was "made properly". Although the play described is a force play as described in 2-29-3, I am going to cite 8.2.3 SITUATION in the Fed 2002 Case Book. This case is a similar situation at first where the batter-runner misses first base, but the fielder "casually steps on first base, though he believes the runner has beaten the throw". According to the new appeal process, this is not a proper appeal as the fielder was not making it clear to the umpire that an appeal was being made. However, the ruling is that the batter-runner is out "because a force play is being made ... and is the result of continuing action". The key words there are "continuing action". In greymule's example, the force play WAS NOT part of the continuing action, therefore a proper appeal must be made, i.e. the fielder must make it clear to the umpire he is making an appeal, not just plop his butt on the bag while in possession of the ball. If I were the umpire in this situation, I would not grant that appeal unless a coach or player verbally stated that they wanted to appeal that missed base. Then and only then would I grant the appeal and nullify all the runs scored.

Yes, continuing action is mentioned, though never defined. But we also have authoritative opinion that the accidental force is still in effect even after intentional walks (where no pitch is thrown). Certainly, if the ball goes back to the mound and then the coach orders a batter or batters intentionally walked, we don't think of that as continuing action, yet the accidental force still looms as possible. We also have case play involving a fielder nonchalantly tagging a runner who has slid safely into 3B after missing 2B, and a fielder who is walking in from the outfield toward the mound, presumably after play has stopped, and who kicks dirt off 2B to trigger the accidental force play.

It would be nice to know exactly at what point the accidental force is not possible.

Analogies to appeals are not really valid, because although we've been calling this play an accidental appeal, it's really an accidental force play (that happens to look like an appeal).

Maybe next year the entire point will be moot (or they'll define continuing action precisely!).

Any of that certainly would be nice, but just for argument's sake, if the appeal is not made right away (i.e., after intentional walks, pick-off plays, etc.), I'm not going to grant it unless the defense makes it absolutely clear that they are making an appeal. Thanks for your input!

I may have missed this authoritative opinion as stated.
Can you direct us where to look?


Freix

Freix: I'll look, but for now all I remember is that it was in one of the posts positing outrageous calls an umpire would have to make regarding accidental force plays. Somebody asked about whether intentional walks nullified future accidental force plays, and somebody else got an unequivocal "no" from a Fed official. Or maybe it was appeals, and we extended it to force plays. I'll try to find it, but I can't spend time on that at the moment. Must have been a few days before the time this thread started.

I hope that before this rule is sent to oblivion, I get to call it just once, preferably in one of its most preposterous incarnations. Of course, I hope the score is 13 to 4 in the 7th, and the call goes against the team in the lead (and they're the visitors).

[Edited by greymule on Apr 25th, 2002 at 05:31 PM]

OK. It's a citation of Kyle McNeely under "Fed appeal situation" that began with JJ on March 17. It is indeed about appeals, not accidental forces, but apparently a lot of people figure the accidental force should be treated like an appeal. That's what we don't really know.

According to everything I've gotten from higher ups in Fed, they say the accidental on forces only. Any appeal has to be done correctly. I finally got my first deadball apppeal the other day. This rule change really hasn't caused the problems that we were afraid it would. However I say that only because there are very few appeals per season anyway. Fed needs to try to clean up some of the loopholes over the winter.

I'd disagree.....that is what we DO know.

We know that an accidental appeal must be on a forced runner, and that action of retiring the forced runner must occur during continuous action.

<ul>*8.2.3 SITUATION: 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 the force play is being made on the runner <b>and is a result of continuing action</b> [my emphasis], F3 is not required to appeal the missed base and needs only to complete the force out.</ul>
That is why the scenerio of intentionally walking batters and then obtaining an accidental appeal cannot occur. Such "accidental" appeal would not be a result of continuous action. A specific appeal would be required.


Just my opinion,

Freix

Thank you Freix. Please note my previous post in this thread.

Yes, the "accidents" can happen on forces only. That's why they're accidental forces, NOT appeals. The question is just when continuing action ends. At the time of "relaxed live ball"?

The question is just when continuing action ends
 

Without a proper definition of "continuing action", my interpretation is that the continuing action ends at the end of the play involving the runner missing the base to which he was forced. The Fed defines a play as "a unit of action which begins when a pitcher has the ball in his possession in pitching position and ends when ball becomes dead or pitcher again holds the ball while in pitching position". So my interpretation of the rule is that an "accidental force" is only ruled upon until the end of the play. Anytime after that, the defense must make a proper appeal. I believe this is the intent the Fed has, they just haven't put it in black & white (does that surprise anyone??).