missed 1st base mechanic
 

Ok, I'm a big believer in looking/finding for your own answers--just another good reason to get my nose back in the books.
There also comes a time when one just has to say 'You're a dummy, ask for help".....
I'm looking for the FED mechanic for BU when the BR beats the throw to F3 but misses the bag.
Its been my understanding that a silent "safe" arms outstretched mechanic is the recommended one, as the runner is considered to have "safely reached the bag" until an appeal.... whereas a "no mechanic" tips off the defense= unfair advantage. The defense then has to appeal or tag the BR or bag prior to BR returning to the bag.

I can only find casebook 8-2-3(pg67) "BR ...arrives safely but misses 1st base..." or the Umpires Manual (pg 35) #19 Appeal Play: "When an umpire observes a base running error, he should make no verbal or non verbal statement that could tip either team."

If possible, the book and page # would be appreciated.
Thanks, Dan

Professional instruction on this play is: use your usual "safe" mechanic and verbalize "Safe!" If the batter-runner beats the throw, then he has acquired the base and he is safe. I do nothing different from the play where the BR touches the base before the throw arrives.

If the defense appeals the missed base before BR returns to the base, I will rule on it.

I don't have much use for the FED umpire manual, and I can't find my red book at the moment, sorry.

In my opinion, the FED umpire manual is a piece of garbage, which is where it would have ended up if I had ever seen one in 20+ years of HS baseball.

I would, as Mbyron says, go ahead and make your usual safe call. By giving the silent treatment, you are actually going against the book by the non-verbal statement of not saying, "safe," like you would usually do. That could tip off the defense even more than a verbal call.

Call the runner safe, as if he touched the base, and make the defense be bright enough to notice that he didn't touch the base.

Make your normal safe call because the runner IS safe until a proper and timely appeal by the defense.

Runner is assumed to have legally acquired a base when passing, even if missed, until properly appealed.

Got a rules reference for this? I don't believe a runner has a base until he touches it.

My thinking exactly. If the defense touches the base, accidentally or on purpose, before the runner returns, I find it hard to believe that I can't call him out. This is rewarding the offense for messing up.

That said, if the defense never touches the bag (or the runner), I've got nothing. The runner will return and touch the bag.

What's the mechanic for the same play at the plate? AFAIK, I make no call until:

1) The runner enters the dugout
2) The runner comes back and touches the plate
3) The defense tags the runner (or the plate if he's making no effort to return)

FED used to use the accidental appeal; however, they have since taken it out. I will have to look up the references, don't have my books with me, but I think it was a couple of years ago.

thanks
David

I thought that, too, and was looking for the rule reference, but found this instead:

Casebook 8.2.3 Situation: B1 hits a slow roller to F5 and arrivs safely but misses first base. F3 catches the ball with his foot off the base and casually steps on first base, although he believes the runner has beaten the throw. RULING: B1 is out. Because a force play is being made on the runner and the result of continuing action, F3 is required to appeal the missed base and does so by stepping on the missed base.

This sounds like an accidental appeal to me.

That's FED for ya. Clear as mud.

When FED removed the accidental appeal from the rule book they neglected to delete that situation from the casebook. Elliot Hopkis acknowledged that fact and issued a statement that that ruling was no longer accurate. He issued a statement again the next year when that situation still appeared in the book

Why it remains unedited to this date is a mystery, but the fact is the accidental appeal has been removed from the rule book, and that was a POE at the time.

This is correct. You can X out that case play if you like: it is no longer a valid ruling.

So let me get this straight so I don't look like the rookie umpire:

BR misses 1B without defense tag of base or runner before BR passes: Signal safe and wait for an appeal.

BR misses 1B with purposeful tag of base or runner after BR passes (no verbal appeal is made): Signal safe and wait for verbal appeal.

BR misses 1B with appeal: Call BR out on appeal.

Correct.

Incorrect. A "purposeful" tag is regarded as a non verbal appeal. What the rule eliminated is the accidental touch, like tripping over the bag.

Correct.

wow this is gonna be a 5 page thread on this.... its not hard.. the runner is safe until the defense appeals... if a runner leaves a base early on a fly ball, do you call him out cause he left early, or do you wait till the defense appeals? Its not rocket science guys. sorry if i make someone mad.

Well it's not quite that easy. Thanks goodness we have an umpire who actually wants to learn a rule application.

What they eliminated was plays like R1, BR hits into the gap and R1 misses
2B on the way to third. Until a couple of years ago, if F9 threw the ball in to F6 and he accidentally stepped on the bag, you had an out.

Now, it requires an actual appeal.

Same with the play at 1B, it's a little tricky. And of course you have plays at the plate which are completely different.

So, it's not rocket science, but its not all that easy to understand either. ;)

Thanks
David

Also eliminated is the following accidental appeal: BR beats throw to 1B but misses the base. F3 gloves the throw and has his foot on the base. Formerly, his having the ball and touching the base constituted a missed-base appeal, and BR would be called out. (This is the main point of the gone-but-not-gone case.)

So regarding the question about a "purposeful" tag, I would have to rule on what the purpose was. F3 gloving the throw (late) has a purpose, but that purpose is not an appeal. If is purpose is to appeal and he makes that obvious in some way (usually by stating "he missed the base!" or some such), then I will rule on the appeal.

And how does your description differ from that of what Umpmazza said?

How has the BR beaten the throw to 1B if he hasn't touched the base yet? I fail to see the logic here. SO if the BR steps to the side of the base and runs through, you're safing him if he "beats the throw?"

Yes. A runner acquires the base when he touches it or passes it. If a runner crosses, but does not touch, home plate, and there is no appeal, he scores a run.

1.How do you handle a missed base at second?

No different.

2. "Safing" ? Would the opposite be "outing"?

OK Don, let me try to help your logic.

If BR hits a ball to the gap, misses first on his way to second. When BR is half way to second, F9 throws the ball out of play. Where are you going to place the BR?

That is confusing. I guess its good for us umpires that coaches don't read rule books. :D

That is the value of the internet. You have sites like this one that can clarify things that the FED won't address.

Also on the FED site, you have the Interpretations posted on the internet that clarify some of the mistakes etc.,

NCAA does a good job of addressing changes several times a year, problems that are occuring. FED should follow suit.

But as you stated, coaches don't know the rule so you don't have anything to worry about. ..:D

Thanks
David

No. The rulebook has it right. It's the casebook that wasn't corrected.

The ones I deal with don't read either.

I hate that expression almost as much as saying, "I balled the pitch." It too sounds a little bit "odd.";)

[QUOTE=DonInKansas;587888]How has the BR beaten the throw to 1B if he hasn't touched the base yet? I fail to see the logic here. SO if the BR steps to the side of the base and runs through, you're safing him if he "beats the throw?"[/QUOTE]


Everyday today and twice on sunday....LOL come on man did a tornado run through your field..... of course your going to safe him, the runner beat the ball to the base right? now the defense has to appeal that he missed a base...

Both expressions make umpires sound as illiterate as some players. My ears cringe when someone tries to make a verb by adding "ing" to just any word.

As for your example, anyone who "balled" anything during a game in public should be prosecuted.

If the BR steps to the side of the bag, he hasn't passed it. Out would be correct.
The play requires the runner to be beyond the bag clearly. Not just his lead foot, hand, or head all the way past..

And the appeal must be clear and obvious: Ex. BR misses 1B, has beaten the throw is called safe. But has missed the bag, BR now turns to the left into fair territory on his return to 1B. F3 with his new gained knowledge of appealing a runner missing 1B, turns and tags the returning runner. Unless he say's something to indicate an appeal of the missed base; I call safe, "no, he did not make an attempt or fake towards 2B.

I didn't see anyone answer these for you:
1. You make no call, the run counts.
2. You make no call, the run counts.
3. You call him out, if he missed the plate and there is "a proper appeal".

The only time you signal anything at any base is when there is a play.
Or in the instance of a time play.
So, if I see you on a grandslam, make 4 safe calls, I'm throwing a peanut at ya from the gallery..

Just remember you don't rule on a runner missing a base or leaving early. You rule on an appeal of a runner missing a base or leaving early.

We are taught that the runner is assumed to have touched the base and we are supposed to let the defense make an appeal. We then rule on the appeal.

The idiotic FED rule of the umpire calling runners out has been removed for a long time now (thankfully) and all the codes agree.

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,

It was a LONG stretch to even suggest the issue at home, but the logic is getting all messed up here. I don't know what else to say, gents. I've got two different interpreters in two different states (Virginia & Missouri) that are telling me to "no call physically or verbally until something happens, by the offense, by going back to touch the base or defense, by appealing".

Maybe it depends on the area your are in or your likes and dislikes for FED rules. I am a little thrown off, though, by some that would toss the FED book or just pick and choose what to rule on. I would be a little miffed should a coach ask me to rule using OBR or MLB while working a FED game. FED game, FED rules.

Tim,

I'd argue that 'doing nothing' is not following the FED mechanic. 'Doing nothing' gives a signal to the defense that something isn't right. Signaling 'safe' is the correct move to avoid tipping off the defense.

The overwhelming consensus here is to signal safe and wait for an appeal.

That's too bad that majority rules. When I have an arguement with a coach, I will be using the FED books and mauals to make my case, not what the majority of the board says.

Wow!
 

Royal:

Next you'll tell us that on a bases empty triple you guys have the plate umpire cover third base.

Oregon, with the blessing of the NFHS, use "Oregon Modified Mechanics" and we teach the entire state through a manual ("Umpiring for the Two Umpire System") to make things consistent.

Just because one works an NFHS games does not mean you must use NFHS Mechanics . . . we have moved into the 21st Century.

Regards,

Your mistake, which I and others have already pointed out, is that you're only reading part of the statement and ignoring the part about tipping off either team. By not signaling safe you're tipping off the defense.

By signaling, though, you are giving a "non-verbal" statement.

In Missouri there are no other manuals that have been created or written to suppliment the FED. Until then and with the backing of our local interp, a no-call is being made until something happens.

As for the rotation, no rule infraction here. I'm saving my partner and keeping him at the plate. The missed base is a rules infraction. The rotation of umpires has no bearing on the rules.

As I stated in post #2 of this thread, answering the OP, professional instruction is to do as I've said on this play. Signal and verbalize "safe" when the runner acquires 1B ahead of the throw, whether or not he touches the base.

You're not interpreting the FED manual correctly. The instruction not to signal is an instruction not to signal the ERROR. The only way to do so is to signal the BR's acquiring 1B in the usual fashion.

You can do what you like, but you have no backing by rule or any mechanics manual. And I will trust my pro school instruction over your anonymous sources "in two states."

I might be checking on to make sure the interpreters are not simply giving an opinion, (based on old old theology).

In calling FED rules, please be sure to follow FED rules, but the FED manual is not a rule book. It is simply a suggestion to help standardize mechanics. As Tim noted, the FED manual is out of sync with the rest of the baseball world, has been for many years.

Thanks
David

not all of Virginia, apparently....
 

Don't know about Missouri, but I'm a current Virginia umpire, and not only are you in the minority opinion on this board, but there's not been any Virginia interpretation that I've heard contrary to what everyone's trying to tell you.

You're also now making the mistake that the coaches know the rules. At all. Or that they know the specific differences between OBR and NHFS. OR that they know, or give a $%^#, about what the FED umpire manual says. If they want to argue, they will argue.

And grabbing the crappy end of the stick by insisting on this will lead to more trouble than its worth. You stand there, signaling nothing, and both coaches will yell and scream, and the one that "loses" the call will yell even more.

[QUOTE]First off the scenario we are discussing is rare, however,

Let's GET REAL and that will answer your question.

You are F1, F4 or F3. B1 beats the PLAY, and misses first base and Blue says or Signals NOTHING.

As a Fielder if you do not get a call (even a casual one) from the BU.

Guess what! The light-bulb! will go off and even if you didn't see the runner miss the base, you will instinctively say "Blue the runner missed first base" otherwise the BU would have signalled something. Now you got a cheap out.

That's the rationale for making the safe call at first base, because you might as well signal and say OUT if you remain silent.

Pete Booth

Its my opinion(and we all know whats those are worth) that most umpires that dont want to signal safe per the OP, are basing their decision on their ego, not on FED interpretations.

They just dont want to signal safe, then "out" after a proper appeal because it makes them look unsure of their call (kinda like--"safe, no wait...out!"), then here comes a coaches wrath.....so its more of--how can I work this game, quietly, and look good.....

Similarly, by not signaling, you are giving a "non-verbal" statement too. The difference is that the first case (signaling as if the base wasn't missed) doesn't tip off either the offense or the defense, whereas the second (not signaling anything) tips off both teams and likely gives an unfair advantage to the defense.

Which mechanic better satisfies the FED manual?

The majority of umpires on this board have seen and done lots more than I have on the field and I trust what they have to say. I would go with the majority here in a majority of cases. Just my view.

And no, a safe sign doesn't tip anyone off because it's what everyone expects. Learning when to follow something to the letter is part of improving at umpiring.

Just accept that this IS the correct thing to do, learn from it and move on. When the majority has the experience that the majority on here have, you need to open your eyes and see the light. Cuz when this majority is this united, it can only mean they're right. If they weren't, you'd see others arguing on your side. (There's a reason you don't)

The majority rules because they're right.

When you hae an arguement with a coach you should explain it EXACTLY as it has been explained to you here. He is safe until a proper appeal is made. He acquires the base once he touches or passes it. He beat the ball TO the base, he's safe. He missed the base, now he's out on appeal.

Simple discussion:
"You called him safe"
"yes, sir"
"Why'd you change it?"
"I didn't. He missed the base and they appealed. I saw him miss it, so I called him out on the appeal."

FED 8-3-8: "A runner acquires the right to the proper unoccupied base if he touches it before he is out."

I don't see anything about assuming he touched it if he passes over it.

FWIW, I've learned from here to call it like others have been taught, but I don't agree with it.

Missed Base Appeals
 

How did this thread turn into a poll? The umpires on this board would not waste their time discussing this mechanic unless they were absolutely sure about it. I believe these missed base mechanics are also stated in the BRD and J/R's 100 Knotty Problems.

Some important things to note about a missed base and its proper appeal.
1) One mechanic aplies to 1B.
2) A different mechanic exists for HP.
3) 2B or 3B situations must also be recognized (treated differently than 1B and HP).
4) Read MLB, J/R, and BRD caseplays for understanding of missed base mechanics.
5) Read older threads on this website for similar explanations taken directly from JEA.
Search revealed a) http://forum.officiating.com/basebal...irst-base.html, b) http://forum.officiating.com/basebal...-question.html
6) Venture into similar discusions on other umpire boards {eteamz, abua, nfhs and eumpire}.

Don't agree? Well, if R1 misses 2B on a safe single and goes to 3B, and if the defense fails to appeal, what are you going to call? "He missed 2B, he's out!"

I don't think so. You don't "assume" he touched 2B, you treat him as if he did until his infraction is properly appealed. Doing so is the basis of every rule about missed-base appeals.

Confused - Missed Plate Mechanic
 

Sorry - but i seemed to have gotten confused on the proper mechanics for a runner missing home plate.
1. Runner overruns plate with no play at the plate. (no signal)
2. Runner with a play at home slides past the plate (no touch) and no tag by catcher? Runner gets up and heads for dugout. (mechanics?):confused: Thanks for input in advance.

1) Since there's no play, there's no signal. This is whether the runner touches the plate or not.

2) No signal. Since the runner is heading for the dugout, the defense need only appeal the out.