Bases Awarded??

[Rich]

Originally Posted by LakeErieUmp

I agree with dash. I also don't believe we need to have the runner go through the exercise of returning to first, touching it, then going to third on the out of play award. Basically, I don't think "touching up" is that big a deal in this situation.

First of all, this only applies in FED ball, so I'll restrict my comments to that. It's still an appeal. I award bases. Runner returns, touches first, goes to third. The ball is dead. Someone still has to appeal this.

Here is my reasoning: many of you are saying R1 is subject to appeal for leaving too soon and, since the ball went out of play before returned he did not arrive at 2B legally. And, since he he can't return to 1B he's going to be out no matter what he does.
But here's the problem - if that were the case, R1, fly ball to RF down the line. R1 takes off thinking it'll drop.F9 makes a flying circus catch, lands, and sees he'll never get a throw off th F3 to double off the runner. So he tosses the ball into the stands. SAME situation. Dead ball. R1 has not returned. Are you going to ring R1 up because F9 threw the ball out of play?
Forget the retouch on a dead ball. Don't waste the time. Award 3B and play ball.

There is a specific rule that deals with F9 throwing it away on purpose. I mentioned that in a previous post. The runner is THEN (in FED only, since that's the only place this applies) allowed to retouch and advance. And this retouch business is important since all awarded bases have to be touched in order in accordance with the rules of baserunning. And a rule of baserunning is that all runners must retouch their time of pitch base after a ball is caught or be subject to appeal.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

I am aware of the J/R interpretation and don't agree with it. To me, J/R is misreading the rule rather than interpreting it. Is there any other "authoritative opinion" supporting J/R? Is it in the BRD? What does Evans say about it?

Thanks.

Section 430 of the 2008 edition of the BRD covers this quite thoroughly. It's exactly as Bob and I have been saying. I don't have time to type in the text, so you'll have to trust me.

[dash_riprock]

I trust you. Thanks. Do you know if Childress cites J/R for the rules difference?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

I trust you. Thanks. Do you know if Childress cites J/R for the rules difference?

He doesn't in that particular case, although he does in other places in the book.

His citation is stronger, actually. The PBUC manual (section 3.10) says that "A runner may not return to correct a baserunning infraction if, after the ball becomes dead, he advances to and touches a base." Same ruling in the MLBUM (section 5.12).

Just one of those (reasonably) well known rules differences quirks between OBR and FED. I did learn something during all this though -- the NCAA rule requires that the runner be returning at or near the TOT or he will not be allowed to return (Note 392, BRD, section 430).

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

I am aware of the J/R interpretation and don't agree with it. To me, J/R is misreading the rule rather than interpreting it. Is there any other "authoritative opinion" supporting J/R? Is it in the BRD? What does Evans say about it?

Thanks.

Here's PBUC (n.b. play 2):

3.10 AWARD MADE FROM ORIGINAL BASE AFTER CATCH:

If a runner is forced to return to a base after a catch, he must retouch his original base even though, because of some ground rule or other rule, he is awarded additional bases. He may retouch while the ball is dead, and the award is made from his original base.

Examples:

1. Runner on first, one out. Hit and run. Batter hits a line drive to the shortstop, who catches the ball for the second out. Shortstop's throw to first is wild and goes into the stands. Runner originally on first is between first and second when wild throw is made.

Ruling: Runner originally on first is awarded third. However, while the ball is dead, he must return to and retouch first base before he touches second on his way to third. If he touches second he may not return to first, and if the defensive team appeals he is declared out at first.


2. Runner on first, one out. Batter flies out to right field for second out. However, runner on first thought there were two out and is between second and third when the ball is caught. Right fielder's throw to first is wild and goes into dugout. Runner is between second and third when ball goes out of play.

Ruling: Runner is awarded third (two bases from his original base). However, while the ball is dead, he must return to and retouch first base. Furthermore, since he was between second and third when the ball went out of play, he must return to first before he reaches and touches third (the next base). If he touches third he may not return to first, and if the defensive team appeals he is out at first.

[dash_riprock]

Thanks Bob & Rich. I accept the interpretation, but I hope you don't mind if I refer to it as an "officially-approved misreading of the rule."

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

Thanks Bob & Rich. I accept the interpretation, but I hope you don't mind if I refer to it as an "officially-approved misreading of the rule."

Only if you refer to the other 234 "mistakes" in OBR the same way.

[UmpJM]

dash,

The rule is properly applied as Bob and Rich suggest.

The problem is the tortured syntax of the A.R. which defines the rule.

The clause "when the ball is dead" applies to

"...if the runner has advanced to and touched a base beyond the missed base."

just as much as it does

"...no runner may return to touch a missed base or the one just left ...".

Try putting that clause at the end of the AR instead of the beginning.

The 2nd case play Bob J. quoted from the PBUC unequivocally demonstrates that this is the correct interpretation. We also have the following from the MLBUM which, again, demonstrates that what the runner does BEFORE the ball goes out of play doesn't matter. What he does AFTER the ball goes out of play (i.e. "When the ball is dead...") DOES:

(5) Runners on first and second, one out. Batter hits deep fly ball that is caught by right fielder. The runner from second was running when the ball was hit, did not tag up, and proceeds to touch and round third base. After the runner from second has rounded third base, the right fielder throws behind the runner from first, who is returning to first base. The fielder's throw is wild and goes out of play. The umpires call "Time" and award the runners home and third. When the umpires call "Time" the runner from second is between third and home, and the runner from first is between first and second. At this point the manager yells to the runner from second (who is between third and home) to go back and tag up at second base. Is this permissible, or is the runner considered a "base beyond" the base he left too soon?

Ruling: It is permissible for the runner to return to second base while the ball is dead. When the ball went out of play the runner originally on second base was past third (between third and home). The runner's "next base" is therefore home. While the ball is dead he may return to second base and retouch at any time prior to touching home plate. However, if the runner advances to and touches home while the ball is dead, he may not return.

JM

[dash_riprock]

I understand all that. I just wish the A.R. said "advances" instead of "has advanced."

[Rich]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

I understand all that. I just wish the A.R. said "advances" instead of "has advanced."

It's a frustrating read, for certain. It's why all the other books (Evans, J/R, PBUC, MLBUM, BRD, etc.) exist.

In a perfect world, we wouldn't need to have an entire bookshelf dedicated to this kind of thing.

[RPatrino]

MB, I wasn't trying to tell the OP how to rule on the play, I was "reviewing" for his edification, the basics. The way I read the OP, R1 had "run all the way to 2nd base". Sorry to disappoint you..(wink).

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

Thanks Bob & Rich. I accept the interpretation, but I hope you don't mind if I refer to it as an "officially-approved misreading of the rule."

How can the guys that wrote the rules "misread" them?

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

How can the guys that wrote the rules "misread" them?

They didn't write the rules. And those who did should be embarrassed to admit it.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

They didn't write the rules. And those who did should be embarrassed to admit it.

MLB wrote the rules AND the MLBUM.