Runner slides past bag
 

Play: R1 and R3, 2 outs. Grounder to F5. He elects to force out R1 at 2nd. His throw pulls F4 off the bag to the left-field side as R1 slides past the bag without touching it. F4 then tags R1 as he attempts to scramble back to the bag. Before the tag, R3 has crossed the plate.

Does R3's run count?

Does the axiom, "a base passed is a base touch" apply here?

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

As you've described the play, I've got a tag on a runner off his base. That's time play, and the run scores.

If the fielder turns around after the play and says, "he missed the base!" or something else that makes this an appeal play, then I've got a missed base appeal on a force play, and the run does not score.

As you know, appeals must be unmistakable. As you've described the play, it is not an appeal. I would give the defense until they leave the field to make the appeal.

Oddly, I found almost this exact play in my 2006 edition of BRD. It says, in FED, such a tag is still considered a force out. So, the run would not score. Under OBR or NCAA, it would be exactly as you described.

That ruling might be based on the now obsolete FED concept of an "accidental appeal." Since the current principle is that appeals must be unmistakable, I would apply the ruling at all levels.

What is the section number for the 2006 BRD interpretation offered above?

The reason I ask is that sometimes this helpful publication can be kind of tricky to navigate if you don't know just what you're looking for. I couldn't find this in my 2008 edition.

Also, one of the sections noted as "removed" in 2008 had something to do with "reinstating a force out" and I'm wondering if that's the one you're referencing.

I only have the 2008 BRD as well....if it helps, I'm pretty sure there's a case play in the MLBUM that I can look up if you're interested...but w/o looking it up, I'm pretty sure a missed base is considered a touched base from an appeal standpoint..

2008 BRD p 19. tag play unless the runner touches a succeeding base. (FED) The NCAA interp surprises me a bit though

The website that sells the J/R includes this question in a quiz. Their answer is that the run scores, and no appeal is allowed. I'll see whether I can find it to post.

Here it is:

R3, R1, two outs. Ground ball up the middle, just past the pitcher's right side. The shortstop gloves the ball in front of second base and attempts to tag the sliding R1 instead of tagging the base. The tag is missed, but R1 slides past the base without touching it. As R1 scrambles back to the base, the shortstop tags him before he is able to return. R3 scored before the tag was applied for the third out (a 'time play'). The defense appeals that R1 missed second base, hoping to get a force out-an 'advantageous fourth out' - to negate the run.

a. The appeal is upheld; R1 is out and the run cannot score since the third out is now a force out.
b. The appeal is not allowed, the run scores.
c. The umpire should simply call R1 out for being out of the baseline, thus avoiding this whole mess.

The correct answer is "b" (the appeal is not allowed, the run scores), at least according to how professional umpires are likely to officiate this play. In theory, Jaksa and Roder agree with answer "a" (the appeal is upheld; R1 is out and the run cannot score since the third out is a force out), but felt it necessary to write the rule as it is likely to be enforced on the field, as in answer "b." The problem lies in the fact that the Official Rules do not specifically define what constitutes an appeal. As our quiz question shows, when appeals meet force plays, the rules are especially inadequate.

The above of course applies to OBR. Remember that in Fed, it was actually "accidental force play," even though it was commonly called "accidental appeal." A BR who had hit a triple and missed 2B was not out if F4 had the ball and, without appealing, tripped over 2B before throwing the ball to F1. But if the BR had missed 1B (yes, I know it's not officially a force, but it applied in Fed), then an accidental touch of the base would have resulted in an out.

are you guys sure that the accidental appeal still applies to FED?

Regarding FED, I have a situation in the "Rules by Topic" book on page 85 (8.2.2 Sitch E)

The runner misses 2B and, with the ball still in play, attempts to return and touch 2B. The defense simply announces that he missed the base. RULING: Since the runner has initiated action to return, the defense must tag him unless it is a force play, in which case all they would need to do is touch the base with the ball.

In reading this...if the 3rd out of the inning is a force play, no run scores. In FED, this is not a time play. That ruling does not make sense to me...but that is how it reads for FED...I hope others chime in here with citations and/or case plays.

BRD also states that NCAA and OBR could have an advantageous 4th out opportunity here...BRD play 13-10

A runner who passes a base without touching it has acquired the base. That means the force is off for that runner. If a run scores before he is tagged off the base, it's a time play and the run counts.

The "accidental appeal" was abandoned by FED several years ago. Case 8.2.3 is still in the case book, but it is wrong by rule (and FED has issued e-mail instructions to ignore it).

I haven't done Fed since 2002. How does Fed now handle the play where the BR beats the throw to 1B but misses the bag? It is treated the way OBR treats it (i.e., runner is called safe but is liable to be out on appeal)?

The call used to be "out" on the theory that the BR had not yet touched the base, and the "accidental force play" stemmed from that principle.

Yes.

I don't like it, but it looks like FED still considers it a force play -- 2-29-3

ART. 3 . . . A force play is a play in which a runner (or two or three runners) loses his right to the base he occupies and is forced to advance because the batter becomes a batter-runner. For a given runner, a force play ends as soon as he touches the next base or a following runner is put out at a previous base. When a runner advances beyond a base to which he is forced without touching it, the force play remains.

When a runner advances beyond a base to which he is forced without touching it, the force play remains.

Since the accidental force play no longer exists, it's hard to tell exactly what that sentence is supposed to cover. It may be a reminder that if the runner misses a base to which he is forced, the appeal will be considered a force out even after a following runner has been put out.

The force play remains for a missed-base appeal. If they merely tag the runner while he's off the base, that is not a force play.

MB -

Then I need help w/the following play from the BRD...Play 12-10 (page 18 in the 2009 revision): R1 moving on the pitch, R3, 2 out: B1 punches the pitch to short. F6's only play is at second, not in time. But R1 slides around the base without touching it. As he tries to scramble back, F4 tags him out. (my emphasis). Meanwhile, R3's run scores. Ruling: In FED, the tag of R1 is a force out: The run does not count. In NCAA and OBR: (a) If the defense does not appeal, R3's run scores. (b) If it appeals, R1 becomes a force out for the "fourth" out, and the run does not count.

Where is this ruling in the FED case book?

mbyron,

Good ol' caseplay 8.2.3 is still in the book. It first appeared in 2005, and was widely believed to be in error and would be revised. So far it hasn't been.

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

See http://forum.officiating.com/basebal...-question.html for an example thread.

For any reader here who wishes to argue that a runner can't be forced to first, see the wrangling in the above thread, and then please ignore the issue. It isn't central to the current topic.

Anyway, 8.2.3 is the basis for the ruling in the BRD.

ETA: Actually, 8-4-2(i) is cited as the basis for the ruling; 8.2.3 is simply related. Childress claims that accidental appeals have been abolished, but not accidental outs.

Any runner is out if he:
"i. does not retouch his base before a fielder tags him out or holds the ball while touching such base after any situation (8-2-1, 2-3 and 4). Umpire may also call him out at end of playing action upon proper and successful appeal."

8-2-1 "An advancing runner shall touch first, second, third and then home plate in order, including awarded bases."

Personally, I am not convinced that CC is correct.

Fed has disavowed Situation 8.2.3 to the point of issuing emails to state interpreters and taking, for them, the extraoardinary step of responding to questions from umpires directly, stating that the change in the rule that eliminated the accidental appeal should be the authority and that Situation 8.2.3 should be considered in error.

This has been gone over and over. The result is the same. The Rule Book rules....there is no accidental appeal in FED

And yet, in spite or extraordinary measures, somehow it remains in the Case Book!

A serious question: How do we know that the FED Rule Book trumps the Case Book?

We don't.

But, other case plays have been added in which the "accidental appeal / accidental force play" is not allowed.

I'll take the new case plays over the old case plays.

Nor am I convinced, much as I hate to be on the other side of Carl. For one thing, 8-4-2(i) addresses "retouch" of a base, which seems to address retouch appeals and not missed-base appeals.

For another thing, 8-4-2(i) does not support the ruling in the case. The issue is whether the runner who is forced to 2B and passes 2B without touching it and is subsequently tagged is a force out. Nothing in this rule says so.

For yet a third thing, the idea of an accidental out is not relevant to the OP, since the fielder intentionally made a play on the runner and tagged him off the base. Indeed, to rule that this is automatically a force (without the necessary explicit appeal) seems precisely to re-institute an accidental appeal, since by merely tagging a runner off base the ruling grants an appeal and reverts the play to a force out. The ruling thus seems to be internally inconsistent.

Finally, since NCAA and OBR are both on the same page here, and there seems to be confusion only for FED, until I see explicit guidance from FED on this play, it seems to make sense to go with a ruling consistent with other FED principles and baseball practice.

So for FED case book writers who are looking into the thread, here's my proposed new case (replete with the deplorable FED "R1 on third" usage).

PLAY: R1 on third, R2 on first, two outs. R2 is stealing on the pitch, and B5 grounds to F6 in the hole. F6 fields the ball but comes up with it too late to get R2 at second base. As he sets to throw to 1B, he notices that R2 has rounded second base and throws to F4 behind him. After R1 crosses the plate, (a) F4 tags R2 off the base. (b) F4 tags R2 off the base and states "he missed the base!" RULING: In (a), R2 has acquired second base by passing it, so this is a time play. R1's run counts, since the force was removed on R2 when he passed the base. In (b), this is an appeal play: if the umpire rules that R2 touched second base, then the ruling in (a) applies and R1's run counts; if the umpire rules that R2 missed second base, then his out is a force play and no run can score since it was the third out of the half inning.

According to NFHS the casebook is "supplement to the Rule Book". It is intended to clarify (insert loud gaffaw here) the rules, not state the rules.

When it comes to this topic, I'll take the word of the NFHS executvie director and the rules committee. The accidental appeal was eliminated by rule.

Who the heII knows why they have failed to update the case book. This isn't the first time.