Abandonment???

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by UmpTTS43

.... let's say that the BR beats out a banger at first and stops 15 ft. behind the base. Instead of returning to first and then ridding himself of his gear, the BR stays at his stopped spot and "dis-equipments." (takes off his elbow and ankle protection) While this is happening, the defense now appeals by either tagging the BR or first base. How can you not uphold the appeal? The defense recognized that the BR did not fullfill his base running responsibilities. By ignoring this appropriate appeal, you are disregarding a rule, which we are there to enforce, and will create an even larger "sh*tstorm."

I have never had to rule on this, but given the correct circumstances, I would uphold the appeal and deal with whatever objection that would result due to my ruling. Correctly upholding this appropriate appeal is no different than upholding any other appealable offence, such as a missed base or leaving too soon on a caught fly ball and should not be considered as being an OOO.

It is common protocol for the batter runner to rid himself of his equipment without having to request Time to do it after overrunning first base. It is different at the other bases, because he isn't allowed to overrun them to start with, so he has to request and be granted Time in order to step off the base and remove his gear, hand them to the bat boy, etc.

Originally Posted by UmpTTS43

I agree with the post that said that upholding the appeal based on the BR taking his gear off while returning to first would be inappropriate. That would be different from the example I described above.

This statement contradicts what you just said. The example above is he stops 15 ft. past the base, and in this one he is walking back to the base. They are exactly the same thing. At some place, he is going to stop, unstrap the leg guard or elbow guard, and then return to the base. Who care if it's down the line or near the base, as long as he then returns immediately to the base?