I tend to disagree with those who would give a "safe" signal for someone who has not legally acquired the base. Who are we rewarding for not following the rules? The rulebreakers? I would hope not.

FED Umpire Manual (pg 35) "...When an umpire observes a base running error, he should make no verbal or non-verbal statement that could tip either team." (I think someone mentioned that already, but it was a good starting point.)

Two scenerios in my mind here. If its a bang-bang of a play and I clearly see BR missing the bag - BR is out! If it's not that close, I do nothing - as the manual says. 1) I wait for either the defense to make a live ball apeal by touching the base or BR before he aquires the base - BR is out! 2) I wait for BR to aquire the base - BR is safe and I do nothing.

Rule 8-2: Penalty (Art. 1-5): For failure to touch a base (advancing or returning),...,the runner may be called out if an appeal is made by the defensive team. The defensive team may appeal during a live ball immediately following the play...A live-ball appeal (8-2-6d) may be made by a defensive player with the ball in his possession by tagging the runner of touching the base that was missed..."

Our job is not to allow the rules to be broken. As per the manual, no signal is given on a missed base. Let the teams figure it out. Our job is not to make the BR safe when he is not.

During my training in Virgnia, it was always emphasised to limit the amount of stress you put yourself in. Why would I want to "safe" a runner when he didn't legally aquire the base (sorry, running over the base does not constitute touching it) and then bang him on an appeal? That's an argument I'm not going to have.

But the runner did legally acquire the base and can only be put out on appeal. You have made a post where you make it quite clear you have no intention of listening to anybody else on the board and are going to use the mechanics that you deem fit to use even if it is incorrect. Best of luck to you.

I'm not here to take the majority rule answer from an opinion poll. If the BR leagally acquired the base, then he can't be put out. In this case, he didn't touch the base, so he is liable to be put out - yes on proper appeal. But, the manual says don't signal anything on a missed base. How is that my mechanic? Where does it say in the FED book to "safe" the BR on a missed base? It doesn't. I'm not putting my personal mechanics in here - just following the FED manual.

Following the FED manual can be very dangerous. All the interps I've ever heard says that the runner is considered safe unless an appeal is made. Don't you agree that not making any call whatsoever would be tipping off the defense that the runner missed the base? If I were the F3 (which was my position in my playing days), I would have known immediately that the runner missed the base when the umpire didn't make any call at all. So the "signal" in this case is the lack of a signal, which tips off the fielder, which in turn creates an unfair advantage and gives away the appeal. It's up to the defense to be alert to the runner missing a base. A runner acquires the base when he touches or passes the base. If he misses the base, he is subject to being called out ON APPEAL. No appeal, no out.

Let me be the devil's advocate here, but why would following the FED be a bad thing? Isn't that what we're suppose to be doing? It's more of a dangerous thing to pick and choose what we will follow (OBR, MLB) or mix and match. That's not fair to the kids and coaches. We expect them to know the rules.

As far as tipping off the defense, they're they ones playing by the rules. They didnt' miss the tag/base, the BR did. Again, why give the advantage to the rulebreaker? But, I would imagine that not everyone will catch a no-call like this. The bright ones will. And as far as interps go, I'll raise you my interps emphasising the "no call." BTW - giving a "safe" is a "non-verbal" signal - going against the FED manual in this situation.

This might not be fair, but this getting-the-base-even-though-he-hasn't-touched-it would be a failing argument if we applied the logic to the defense. Even if the ball beats the runner, by rule we require the defense to touch the base/runner to earn the out unless the BR/R deserts the base. There is an argument about the fantom tag in situations where safty is an issue, but why would we expect the defense to earn the out but then remove the expectation from the offense to earn the base?

I know not everyone is giddy about the FED. So noted. But unfortunately the FED is what governs the rules for the scholastic games we call. Until the FED actuall says to give a "safe" on a BR missing 1B, I've got nothing until the BR touches or the defense touches. I'm not looking for a loosing arguement from a coach for looking like I don't know what I'm doing (safe one moment, out the next??)

By not signaling you're giving the defense a clue that something is amiss. This is exactly what the manual is asking you not to do.

I'm doing exactly what the manual says to do - "...make no verbal or non-verbal statement..." I'm not doing anything with my hands, I'm not saying "safe" or "out." How is that doing anything? By raising my hands and/or saying "safe," am I not making a "verbal or non-verbal statement?"

You're only reading half of the statement and leaving out the key part, "that could tip either team."

If a runner beats a throw to a base but misses the base he's assumed to have touched it. It's incumbent on the defense to appeal the missed base. By not signaling 'safe' you're telling the defense that something is wrong. This is a huge signal to the defense and exactly what the FED manual wants to avoid.

False, even when the runner touches the base. For example: BR hits a safe single to right. He touches 1B (thereby legally acquiring it) and rounds the base as the throw comes in to F3 behind him. He is tagged off the base for an out.

A runner legally acquires a base by touching it or by passing near enough to it to reach it (arm's length). You don't seem to know this basic definition.

I think you're a troll.

Nice mbyron, but no I'm not a troll. I prefer the FED site, but since it's having issues, I took more time to read some posts here and found this one.

The FED manual says NOT to make a NON-VERBAL statement. So why would you persist in MAKING a non-verbal signal by signaling "safe?" I'm trying to understand the logic of not making a signal (FED) by making a signal (you).

Another case play -

8.4.2 SITUATION B: With R1 at first, B2 hits a double into right center, sending R1 to third. However, R1 misses second base. F6 is standing on second when he catches the throw from the outfield. He then throws the ball to the pitcher.
RULING: Although R1 missed second, no call will be made by the umpire because F6 did not make an intentional appeal of the missed base.

Maybe not a troll, but sounds like one. Or an umpire who might not understand the consequences of not making a call.

Close play at 1st, everyone is looking at the umpire, (you make the call out or safe). But wait, I'm not making a call, just standing there like a deer in the headlights.

Now, who has tipped the defense that there is a problem?

BR hits it in the gap and misses 1st on the way to 2B. You're not going to tell the defense he missed first. So why would an umpire want to tell them on the first situation.

R3 tags and comes home on sac fly, he misses the plate. PU signals ...

You make the call.

FED manual BTW is a waste of print, don't waste your time.

Thanks
David

What *usually* happens when BR beats the throw to first (touching the base) by a step or two?

The umpire gives a casual "safe" sign.

That's what should happen when BR beats the throw to fitst (missing the base) by a step or two.

To do otherwise is to make a "non verbal statement" that "something is wrong" and that would tip off one or both teams.

The plate is different because the runner can't be tagged for being "off the base" after touching it. So, you can't give the "safe" sign when there's a missed tag and a missed touch of the plate.

Actually, to be precise, if the runner "overslides" second (either touching or missing the base), the umpire shouldn't make any call, because the runner is still liable to be out on the play. So, it's actually the "safe" call at home that's the exception to the rule. The "no call" is the same as any tag play at second or third.

David - I get paid to follow the FED rules. I'm not wasting my time by doing such.

Well,
 

I certainly hope the NFHS site gets up and running again.

Royal:

Progessive states in the USA have dumped the Federation Umpire Manual YEARS ago. While the rule book frequently changes it appears that nothing has changed in the Fedlandia Manual since the 60's.

Every single authority follows the majority opinion in this thread.

Your arguement that you "get paid to follow FED rules" does not hold water in this case. This is a mechanics question and FED has just fallen behind the times.

Regards,