Missed base: opinions

[Rich]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

I have researched this and there is some disagreement on this.

Let's assume OBR:

On a force play, a runner overslides a base and never touches it. The runner is tagged out trying to scramble back to the base. See the force play is removed once the runner "passed" the base, the tag was a time play. That means that any runs that scored in the interim - count!

Can the defense now make an appeal that the runner missed the base for an "advantageous fourth out" in order to nullify the run?

On that there is disagreement!

* * *

It seems to me, from what I could gather, that under FED and NCAA, in the same situation - the defense could tag the base while the runner is still attempting to scramble back and appeal that the base was missed and gain the out. It is unique to OBR that the runner must be tagged on a force play once they have passed (and missed) the base.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

I would allow the advantageous fourth out in all codes and take my chances with any protest committee. Why should the offense benefit from the (still) missed base?

[DG]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Pick up a Jaksa/Roder manual and read for yourself.

Passing a missed base always removes the (immediate) force based simply on the rulebook. However, that doesn't mean there isn't opportunity to appeal. If the runner is trying to return, he needs to be tagged.

I have a 2008 J/R. What page you reading from because I don't find your interp? A rule book reference would also be good.

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by DG

I have a 2008 J/R. What page you reading from because I don't find your interp? A rule book reference would also be good.

I don't have a copy of J/R in front of me right now, but I have 2006 version of the BRD.

On p.15 (of the BRD) it cites from J/R saying, "If a suspect runner is tagged off base, ... a subsequent appeal of such runner's missed base is not allowed."

The BRD says this is on p.76 or J/R.

Further the BRD claims there is contradictory information as to what the rulebook says on this matter and what J/R says.

The PBUC suggests that a subsequent appeal is possible. J/R says it is not. The BRD recommends going with the PBUC ruling.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[canadaump6]

Guys you have totally disregarded the research I did to help come up with answers to David's questions. The appeal during unrelaxed action I cited was from page 77 of the 2004 Jaksa/Roder book.

I researched the case plays partly to get a better understanding of the rules myself, but also to help someone else out. I would appreciate at least being acknowledged for helping out.