Tigers vs Injuns 5-1-09 Laz Diaz? no-call

[socalblue1]

Originally Posted by johnnyg08

I would agree with your MLBUM example, except there was an attempted tag play prior to B/R simply missing 1B...in this example, B/R didn't necessarily beat the play at 1B because there was already a tag attempt on him.

Does that have anything to do with the type of call here?, that's the only reason I have for referencing a play at home plate where this happens most often.

HUH? BR reached (passed) 1B safely & that's how the call is made. An attempted tag of BR before he reaches 1B means nothing here - a proper appeal is required to obtain an out.

[johnnyg08]

Okay, that's what I was asking...that's why I asked if it made a difference or not.

If it does, then it seems as though his mechanics were incorrect based on the post by Dave Reed.

thx socalblue

[SAump]

Originally Posted by socalblue1

HUH? BR reached (passed) 1B safely & that's how the call is made. An attempted tag of BR before he reaches 1B means nothing here - a proper appeal is required to obtain an out.

F3 missed 2 opportunities to tag B/R. Rulebook aside, an appeal would not be recognized.

A) Does this apply?
Rule 7.10(c) He overruns or overslides first base and fails to return to the base immediately, and he or the base is tagged;
The Indians argued in favor of 7.10(b/d and c) with no luck.

B) Does the exception to Rule 7.08 (c) below apply to the OP?
Rule 7.08 (c) He is tagged, when the ball is alive, while off his base. EXCEPTION: A batter-runner cannot be tagged out after overrunning or oversliding first base if he returns immediately to the base;
The EXCEPTION means nothing in the OP. The exception which protects the batter-runner at 1B is immediately removed once 1B is passed untouched.

C) Does this apply?
Rule 7.08(e) ... The force is removed as soon as the runner touches the base to which he is forced to advance, and if he overslides or overruns the base, the runner must be tagged to be put out. ...
First base is treated no differently than any other base. Best explanation I have!

[socalblue1]

Originally Posted by SAump

F3 missed 2 opportunities to tag B/R. Rulebook aside, an appeal would not be recognized.

A) Does this apply?
Rule 7.10(c) He overruns or overslides first base and fails to return to the base immediately, and he or the base is tagged;
The Indians argued in favor of 7.10(b/d and c) with no luck.

B) Does the exception to Rule 7.08 (c) below apply to the OP?
Rule 7.08 (c) He is tagged, when the ball is alive, while off his base. EXCEPTION: A batter-runner cannot be tagged out after overrunning or oversliding first base if he returns immediately to the base;
The EXCEPTION means nothing in the OP. The exception which protects the batter-runner at 1B is immediately removed if 1B is passed untouched.

C) Does this apply?
Rule 7.08(e) ... The force is removed as soon as the runner touches the base to which he is forced to advance, and if he overslides or overruns the base, the runner must be tagged to be put out. ...
First base is treated no differently than any other base. Best explanation I have!

Tag attempts prior to batter-runner reaching/passing 1B mean nothing so far as allowing an appeal here. Batter-runner missed 1B while passing & may thus be ruled out via proper appeal.

In this case it's unrelaxed action & a tag would be required. IMO this situation should be treated exactly the same way as a runner missing HP (Except we make a safe call when he passes 1B). Nothing more than a simple missed base.

7.08(c) protects a batter-runner who immediately returns to 1B. 7.08(a) does not apply & 7.08(j) Comment allows tag or base touched if no attempt to return.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by socalblue1

Tag attempts prior to batter-runner reaching/passing 1B mean nothing so far as allowing an appeal here. Batter-runner missed 1B while passing & may thus be ruled out via proper appeal.

In this case it's unrelaxed action & a tag would be required. IMO this situation should be treated exactly the same way as a runner missing HP (Except we make a safe call when he passes 1B). Nothing more than a simple missed base.

7.08(c) protects a batter-runner who immediately returns to 1B. 7.08(a) does not apply & 7.08(j) Comment allows tag or base touched if no attempt to return.

SoCal, you might be a little late to the party here and maybe skipped a few posts in the thread. 7.08 is not the rule relevant to missed-base appeals, 7.10 is.

The question concerns whether the appeal was properly constituted (fielder catches ball and tags base while the runner scrambles back). Two rules seem relevant:
7.10(b): either the runner or the base may be tagged
7.10(d): by implication, if the runner is scrambling back to home plate, he (and not the plate) must be tagged; by extension, since the runner may also run past 1B, some favor extending this ruling to 1B.

I have heard authorities in favor of both rulings. Diaz obviously voted with his ruling. I was wondering if this issue had been settled in some authoritative way.

[Dave Reed]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I was wondering if this issue had been settled in some authoritative way.

I think it has been settled by MLBUM 5.4(12):

"Batter-runner hits a ground ball and beats the play at first base but misses the bag.
Ruling: The proper mechanic is for the umpire to call the runner safe, indicating he beat the play. If the defense appeals by tagging the runner (or base) and appealing that the runner missed first base before the runner returns to first base, the batter-runner would be declared out. Note also OBR Rule 7.08(k) Casebook comment and Section 5.3."

The reference to 7.08(k) and Section 5.3 can only mean that the principle behind 7.10(d) should be taken into account. Here's 5.3 (which includes and restates all of 7.08(k), its Comment, and 7.10(d):

5.3 RUNNER MISSES HOME PLATE
Should a runner, in scoring, fail to touch home plate and continue on his way to the bench (making no effort to return), he may be put out by the fielder touching home plate and appealing to the umpire for a decision. However, this rule applies only where a runner is on his way to the bench and the catcher would be required to chase the runner. It does not apply to the ordinary play where the runner misses the plate and then immediately makes an effort to touch the plate before being tagged. In that case, the runner must be tagged. In such cases, base path rules still apply to the runner (i.e., he may not run more than three feet from the "baseline" between him and home plate).

The evidence for extending 7.10(d) to at least first base is:

1. A MLBUM interp specific to a missed first base situation directs the reader to note the interp for a missed home plate.
2. The PBUC interp given to Childress says extend 7.10(d) to all bases.
3. J/R also requires the effect of 7.10(d) at all bases.

I'm not aware of Evans directly addressing the issue. (Poo-poohing unrelaxed/relaxed as "not in the rule book" is both wrong and too terse to be of value.) The only known (at least to me) contrary opinion is from the Wendelstedt school.

[mbyron]

Great. I'm in. Thanks, Dave!

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Dave Reed

I think it has been settled by MLBUM 5.4(12):

"Batter-runner hits a ground ball and beats the play at first base but misses the bag.
Ruling: The proper mechanic is for the umpire to call the runner safe, indicating he beat the play. If the defense appeals by tagging the runner (or base)

Dave, what do you suppose is the reasoning for including the parenthetical statement "or a base" in the above passage? Would it be in the case that the action is relaxed?

All in all, I do like your analysis.

[johnnyg08]

I would say that in this case, he didn't simply beat the play...this play is similar to a play at home plate where the runner slides, misses the base, catcher misses the tag, now it's a race to the base...runner to touch it before he's tagged out.

We can't realistically call an out here by F3 simply touching 1B on this play. This has to be a tag play. That's how I'm interpreting Dave's posts.

[Dave Reed]

Originally Posted by Welpe

Dave, what do you suppose is the reasoning for including the parenthetical statement "or a base" in the above passage? Would it be in the case that the action is relaxed?

I think so. The OBR way of phrasing "relaxed" seems to be "not scrambling back."

[SAump]

Originally Posted by Welpe

Dave, what do you suppose is the reasoning for including the parenthetical statement "or a base" in the above passage? Would it be in the case that the action is relaxed?

All in all, I do like your analysis.

Would it be in the case that the action is relaxed? No. It may apply to relaxed/unrelaxed action. It may not. There is no definitive OBR/MLBUM caseplay. Forget the J/R interp for a moment. It does not "exist" and it cannot be used to justify any valid ruling.

Would it be in the case that some action may prevent the defense from completing a legal "tag" appeal? Yes. For example, the runner is standing on the base. The defense may still appeal that the runner missed the base. The umpire may rule the runner out

What is definitive? It applies to the case where a runner cannot legally return to the missed base as a result of HIS continuous action. There is no disputing this fact. When the defense cannot tag the runner because he is not there or he standing on the base; the only other viable option is to make a verbal appeal and tag the base. The out may still be recorded in this manner which is by rule one of the "unmistakable appeals" accepted by MLB.