did the run score ?
 

bases loaded,2 strikes on the batter. The next pitch, batter check swings.
The ball gets by the catcher. Now heres the tricky part, R3 crosses the plate
before the catcher dives and tags the batter/runner. The check swing was appealed to the base ump, he called it a strike for the 3rd out.
Does the run score ?

No. Batter was out before reaching first.

Not only is the batter/runner out for not being retired before reaching first base, This IS NOT a time play!

Also, on a situation like this, if the swing is called: No he didn't go, the base umpire should come up RIGHT AWAY, with out being checked too, if in his opinion, the batter did go!

This is a very simple play, that happens quite a bit, with a very simple answer!

I'm sorry, I must have missed the tricky part.

Batter retired for the third out before safely reaching first base. No run scores.

Excuse me? That's not his call.

PU should make a quick appeal without being asked if there is any question. I've never heard that BU should simply make a call on this without being asked by PU.

I disagree with this assement.

On topic, no, like everyone else has stated

If on a potentially appealable swing/no swing call in which the batter may become a runner, BU needs to make and announce his decision without being requested via appeal. This is the voluntary strike mechanic.

Sorry, but Maz and Matt are correct. You come right out with it in such a case. BU does not wait for the PU to appeal. I don't know how long this mechanic has been in force, but it seems like years.

Amazing
 

How a question turned into a difference of opinion on an unusual umpire mechanic. I applaud whoever asked the original question.

The base umpire might be calling balls and strikes from the A position if he steamrolls the PU like that. You offer help ONLY IF ASKED by the PU in this situation.

OK -

It seems odd though that it has not been mentioned at any clinic I've attended. Clinics taught by MLB and NCAA umps with a lot of years of experience, a couple of which have taught at Harry's.

Not arguing it, it just seems like someone would have mentioned it.

It's listed specifically in the 2007 MLBUM. I think it's been a relatively new mechanic up here in MN anyway. It was taught to immediately ask, but this mechanic is better...if he goes, BU should simply signal yes he went. The other side of it is that the batter/runner should be coached to sprint it out either way in this case...much like the infield fly rule where it's stated that the players are responsible for knowing the rule regardless of whether or not IFF is called

Same Situation, Almost
 

Question for Ken. Did you mean to ask about a LL, FED, NCAA or OBR ruling?

The catcher doesn't tag the runner. IOW, the catcher races back to the backstop to retrieve the ball and turns to fire toward 1B. He sees the B/R standing outside the box 1BLX and then walks over to tag him (check swing appeal). IOW, the defense makes the appeal while the B/R is standing outside the box inside 1BLX. The B/R had cleared the box to avoid interference w/ play on R3. F1 did not cover the plate, conceeding the run, while pointing out to his catcher to tag the B/R.

Well, it is a mechanic that is used in both Los Angeles and the SF Valley H.S. units. I am not certain about the entire state association.

All I know is that it is the mechanic for this and similar situations. EXAMPLE: [Three-man crew] Two out, runners at first and second, 3-2 count. Runners go on the pitch, a change-up that dies and hits the ground near the opposite batter's box and skips off the catcher's mitt. The batter takes a half-swing, and the BU instantaneously screams "Yes he did," while doing the hammer twice. The runner thinks he walked, so he trots away, then suddenly bolts for first, as the lead runner flies around third. The catcher rdraws to throw for what will be a close play on the batter/runner, and everyone's screaming at him to watch the guy coming from third. He eats his throw and turns toward third and throws behind the guy and starts a rundown. Both trail runners are hesitating between bases, because there are two outs. A throw skips off of the third baseman's glove and rolls away, and the lead runner gets up and heads for home, and the trail runner is tagged out at second right after the guy crosses the plate, who scores on a time play.

This actually happened and it worked perfectly.

And what in hell is this off-topic-so-it-can't-be-discussed nonsense? Good Lord, how dull would any conversation or debate (or life) be if you have to abide by that curious standard?

There is only so much an umpire can do when relying on what a player should do. The sooner a call is resolved, the better for everyone.

For the OP--rendering a decision on the unasked appeal is absolutely necessary. I would say the voluntary strike is most crucial with bases loaded and an uncaught potential third strike. If the batter held, then announcing such ensures that the defense knows that the advancing runner must be tagged. If he didn't, then the defense knows that there is a force and the offense knows that the batter is now in jeopardy.

As for it being a relatively new mechanic in MN, I'm the only one I've ever seen use it, and that was in a B-league game back in '05.

Let me spell again
 

Most catchers dive towards the plate. This catcher dives and tags the the B/R.
You would have to wonder why he dove at the B/R. Wierd?