I concur.

Please dont forget that the rules of Baseball are based on fair play. To call the runner out can, in no way, be justified as fair to the offensive team.

And don't forget that fairness is defined by the rules. No rule protects the runner in this situation. (This is NOT the situation where a fielder playing on a runner accidentally or intentionally pushes a runner off a base.)

I understand your point, but disagree. Not that it would happen ;);), but if you called this play as you state, what would stop a coach from seeing this and start teaching his players to attempt to knock players off the bag any time there is a possible chance to do this? I know this is the extreme, but if (what I perceive as fair play) you place him back on the base, no one has gained an advantage. (whether intentional or not - dont forget that the runner was knocked off of the base completely on the initiative of the fielder, no one is questioning this fact here))

I don't find such a tactic at all plausible. First, I'm kinda impressed that the F6 in the OP could bump a runner off a base and still make a catch. Coaching him to TRY to bump into R2 standing on the base is going to result in dropped pop-ups, not INT calls.

Second, unless F6 is as big as a sumo wrestler, it just ain't that hard for a runner to stay on a base while a fielder is fielding a batted ball, provided that he's watching the fielder and not the ball. If he's not watching the fielder, too bad for him.

Third, I make my calls based on the rules, not what coaches might do if I enforce the rules correctly.

You stand on 2nd base. I will come from the shortstop position, not looking at you but watching the high pop fly that is scheduled to come down about 5 feet to the first base side of 2nd. I guarantee that I can knock you into next week and still catch the ball, come back and tag you while you are still laying where I left you, wondering WTF just happened. You cannot call the runner out for this. If a runner is forced off the base, and had no momentum, he can't get tagged out. What would stop a player from shoving a runner off the base and then tagging him? It would be anarchy, I tell ya.

Sometimes you have to use common sense in the absence of a written rule.

I absolutely agree with this point. Alas for your ruling, there is a written rule. See 7.08(c).

If I'm on 2B watching you, and you're watching a fly ball, I absolutely guarantee I could keep a toe or finger on the base and you couldn't touch me. :p

Again, this is NOT the case where a fielder playing on a runner deliberately or accidentally pushes the runner off the base. The ruling on that play does not apply here, since in that play the fielder is not protected.

So it is OK to push a runner off of the base if no play is being made on him, but not OK if a play is being made on him?

I just dont buy this and nothing in the rule book will support it...

I think in this case, both fielder and runner were watching the pop up. R2 more than likely didn't see it coming. Bam.

No, for my ruling, 7.08(c) does not apply:

(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;

APPROVED RULING: (1) If the impact of a runner breaks a base loose from its position, no play can be made on that runner at that base if he had reached the base safely.

APPROVED RULING: (2) If a base is dislodged from its position during a play, any following runner on the same play shall be considered as touching or occupying the base if, in the umpire’s judgment, he touches or occupies the point marked by the dislodged bag.

Where does it mention the situation where the runner is just standing there minding his own business and gets shoved off the base and tagged? That exception is not addressed, which is why common sense is applied in absence of a clear ruling. This is an ommission in the rules, most likely one of the 235 mistakes in the rules that Jimbo preaches about but never makes MLB fix. Color me confused there:confused:. I guess if he had MLB fix all the broken parts of the book, nobody could make money on interpretation manuals.

Sure, this rule says that if the runner is tagged while off the base, he's out. Again, let's just use common sense and figure that that doesn't mean when he is bullied off the base by an over-zealous fielder.

No error, no omission.

There is no rule that protects a runner who is bumped off the base by incidental contact. At lower levels you might do that, but not HS or above.

You are entitled to your opinion, but you will lose a protest (especially at the upper levels). The runner has a right to that base and when he is knocked off of it, he cannot be called out. (our opinion of course,) And you never answered this:
"So it is OK to push a runner off of the base if no play is being made on him, but not OK if a play is being made on him?" Where is your rule reference for this? The interpretation in the Hrbek play states that the runner is out only if his (offensive players) momentum caused him to leave the base. Clearly this did not happen in the OP..

Incidental contact? Where did you read that? I don't believe "incidental contact" would be forceful enough to knock the runner off the base. It seemed rather intentional to me, from the way the OP was written. He didn't say "bumped off the base," he said "runs into the runner knocking him off the base." Sound like F6 was out of control running amok and carelessly collided with a runner on his legally obtained base. The runner was not interfering with a play, so the fielder doesn't have the right to push him out of the way to get to where the ball was going to land.

I'm not penalizing the runner, no matter what level of ball they're playing. And, I would wager that I would get less grief calling it my way, than if I called the runner out for the wrong actions of F6. I call the runner out and watch all hell break loose. No thanks.

1. I don't think you know what 'incidental contact' means. Contact is incidental when it is not illegal. Did we have OBS by F6? No, since he's fielding a batted ball. Did we have INT by R2? No, since he's entitled to remain on the base. Did we have any other illegal act by either player? No, they were doing what they were supposed to do. But we did have a collision, and no matter how forceful it was, if it was not illegal, it was incidental.

After incidental contact, we play on. And you have yet to come up with a shred of rules backing for your wacky notion that a runner is protected back to his base after incidental contact.

2. I can't fathom how you can envision F6 chasing a fly ball and intentionally running into R2. He's watching the ball! My internal video of this case has F6 running across the field, slowing down near the base, and bumping R2 (who was not paying attention) just before the catch. If the ball were farther right, F4 would have taken it, so he's not running full tilt across the base. But the point is irrelevant: the force of the contact doesn't matter, as long as it's incidental.

I certainly agree that if I judged that F6 intentionally pushed R2 off the base, that would not result in an out. But then again, that would be an illegal act by F6, and not incidental contact. To my mind, there's a significant difference here: in the OP, F6 is doing what he's supposed to -- fielding the ball. In your case, he's not -- he's pushing the runner off base. That's a difference that makes a difference to the ruling.

3. Finally, and again, I think either of our calls will yield equal grief from coaches. I maintain that the rules are on my side, as 7.08(c) clearly applies to this situation.

If you're talking mainly about a case where F6 intentionally pushes the runner off the base, then we're not disagreeing, because I'd rule the same as you. But in the OP, I've got two outs. And barring something new and pertinent in this thread, I think we've covered it pretty thoroughly and won't be posting further.

Whatever:rolleyes:

Yet you still ignore the interpretation of the Hrbek play. It was clearly ruled that the runners initiative, not the defensive players initiative was the key to whether the runner was to be declared out or safe. And if you contend that the plays are different, how? The defensive player either knocked him off of the base or he didnt. The runner is either protected because of the act by the fielder or he is not because he came off by his own initiative. Seems simple to me. (And Oh yeah, fair also.)