Missed Base Appeal Question

[johnnyg08]

Originally Posted by mbyron

AFAIK, no rule code currently allows an "accidental" appeal.

i agree, i guess the intent of my post was to address consistency

[bossman72]

Originally Posted by mbyron

The way to picture this is: R1 rounds 2B but misses it. He immediately scrambles back to the base as the ball comes in to the fielder. He's tagged out, off the base, as he reaches for the base.

According to the J/R principle of unrelaxed action, the runner in this situation, not the base, must be tagged to record an out. The rationale is not fully stated, but I suppose the runner is getting some credit for immediately trying to correct his baserunning error. This credit prevents the defense from appealing the missed base after tagging the runner off the base, and thus prevents an advantageous 4th out. A run could score on a time play, for instance.

Those who dislike the J/R principle deny that the runner gets any credit: if he missed the base, then he's liable to be appealed. Moreover, they argue, the "relaxed/unrelaxed" distinction appears nowhere in the rules. This more conservative interpretation declines to put an additional burden on the defense (tagging the runner, not the base, during so-called unrelaxed action) and allows a missed base appeal even when the runner is tagged off the base trying to get to the base he missed.

I have heard the more conservative interp before, but I'd like to know if it's in print (and authoritative).

This still doesn't make sense though. I'm ok with the fact that you need to tag the runner because he's going back to the base, but it makes no sense on why a subsequent appeal of the miss would be disallowed. The defense didn't do anything that would make them lose the right to appeal...

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by bossman72

This still doesn't make sense though. I'm ok with the fact that you need to tag the runner because he's going back to the base, but it makes no sense on why a subsequent appeal of the miss would be disallowed. The defense didn't do anything that would make them lose the right to appeal...

No, my point was that the offense did, namely attempt to correct the error immediately. Not penalizing the defense, but rewarding the offense. Though the outcome is the same, the rationale makes sense only when you think of it one way.

[SAump]

However, in Chapter 10 about Determining a Run, J/R gets into advantageous 4th outs that would negate runs, ect. He uses this example

MLB does not recognize "all" advantageous 4th outs.
Fourth outs must be the result of a valid appeal play.
MLB does not accept the tagged-twice, appeal play.
In this case, the runner at 2B was tagged out.