Does the run score?
 

I am not an ump, I just read the message board a lot. I was hoping someone could set me straight on this play. This happened in my son's game today.

Bases loaded. 1 Out.
Ground ball to Third.
R2 is tagged out by the third baseman.
R1 reaches and tags second base, however, he gets confused and retreats towards first base. This reinstates the force.
The third baseman throws to second to get the third out. However, R3 crosses the plate before second out. Does the run count?

The ump initially counted the run. The the defensive coach talked him out of it. I did not hear the converstation.

I know that the run would not count if it was a straight forwad double play. However, instinctivly I think that since R1 reached second the run should count. I am having trouble finding anything in the MLB rule book to clarify this.

When R1 retreats toward 1st, the force is reinstated. The run does not score. This is not a time play.

Once R1 retreated toward first base, by rule the force is reinstated. The run does not score.

I agree...The run does not count.

-Josh

Stop looking. Your "instincts" or intuitions are incorrect. R1 merely reaching 2B does not change the play: if the 3rd out is a force play, no run can score (4.09). As the others have posted, the force was reinstated by the baserunning error.

Thanks guys. 4.09 satisfies me.

So, more specifically if a force is possible on that runner and it's the third out, no run can score right? So even if it's a tag, not a force we still have no run right?

If the third out is made during a force situation, no matter how the out is made, no run can score.

You need to look up the definition of a force play. It has nothing to do with how the runner is put out.

Or I could ask the question on here since that is the purpose. I'm aware of what I can look up...thanks

The purpose of this board is to communicate with fellow umpires. This is not a rules verification board! If someone is kind enough to answer your rules question, you say "Thank You" and be on your way. If one of more knowledge than you tells you "you can look this up......", you say "Thank You" and be on your way. That is what respect for each other is about. If you need to learn that, you don't belong here!

JMHO

You're welcome.

Obviously you haven't looked it up, and are content to be snotty. This is a very basic rule that you shouldn't be umpiring without knowing.

It's a force play if the runner is forced to advance. This status has nothing to do with how he is put out — tagging the runner or the base doesn't affect whether the play is a force play.

Are you naturally this grouchy, or is it something you've worked on over time? Is this something I should look forward to? Should I get a mentor?

In the OP, the run of course does not score.

However:

R3, R1, 2 outs. Batter singles down the 3B line. R3 scores, R1 stops at 2B. The ball comes in to the mound. As F1 awaits the next batter, R2 now retreats toward 1B (perhaps thinking the ball was foul, perhaps to retrieve his hat, wrongly assuming that time had been called), and F1 throws to F4 for the reinstated force.

This third out seems to me to be a new play, occurring after the continuing action of the original play. I would not nullify the run.

I know it's so unlikely that it's probably not addressed anywhere, but in 39 years I did see it happen once (though I admit it was in softball).

If it's a "reinstated force" then the run doesn't count. If it's not, then the run does count.

While the timing may determine which it is, there's no time frame when it's both a "reinstated force" and a timing play (to allow the run to score).

I don't understand. Why isn't it a reinstated force regardless of the timing? Even after a pitch, if R2 retreats toward 1B (and there's a runner occupying 1B), isn't the force reinstated? Or has that somehow become a tag play because the batter did not become a runner on that play?

I could look up every rule as I do on my own...or I could come on here and discuss it or do both. During your post games do you just tell your partners to go "look it up, we're not dicussing the rules"...you should do that on your own. Your post is really silly. To say that I have no right to come on here and ask for clarification is one of the dumbest things I've ever read on this board.

Where did anyone say that?

Ugh. Back to Ignore-land for you.

Making you look it up has many benefits

1) You'll discover it.
2) You'll remember it.
3) You'll believe it.

OTOH, if you just have someone tell you

1) You may not believe it.
2) You won't be able to find it when you really need to read it.

Return to pitcher
 

Wiping off a run that has legally scored seems to be more difficult than immediately reinstating the force play once the pitcher has the ball.

It doesn't pay to try to explain it or defend it to anybody, but I, like probably 99% of umps on here do my fair share of looking up.

Reasons a person may respond to a post w/o looking up:

1. access to the site vs access to a rule book
2. feel like discussing first, then looking up to discover/remember/believe
3. flat out don't feel like finding the exact rule and would rather discuss it

We can all bury our heads in a rule book until we are blue in the face...but sometimes it's good to mix it up.

I agree with your post 100%...but to say that I should "look it up" before asking a question on here...would bring an end to the forum pretty quickly.

Not to agree or disagree with either "look it up" or "ask first" but I completely disagree with this statement.

If I have a sitch, I can look up the rule, then discuss it. Sometimes the verbiage isn't clear, sometimes you can't make the connection to your sitch, and sometimes you can't find the exact rule you're looking for. All of these promote discussion and make the board thrive, yet I first attempted to look up the rule myself.

The life blood of the forum is discussing interpretations of the rules, not spitting out rules to keep others from reading.

Again, this is simply in rebuttal to the quoted statement.

I've read the J/R, PBUC, BRD, and the rest of them, but there are still times when you simply can't find what you're looking for or remember the section it was in. I think the objections to the OP were mainly that the answer was obvious, or at least easily found.

There are other times when you know the rule but wonder whether it applies in a particular case. There are, for example, baseball and softball rules (or OBR and Fed rules) that are parallel in wording, but in practice they're interpreted differently.

But I agree that it's annoying when somebody uses the board simply to ask questions whose answers are easily found.