Gameplay Situation I need a ruling on

[Rich Ives]

2009 BRD

#3 Page 13

in 2001 FED, NCAA, and PBUC all ruled that you CAN get the advantageous 4th out appeal at first.

[johnnyg08]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

2009 BRD

#3 Page 13

in 2001 FED, NCAA, and PBUC all ruled that you CAN get the advantageous 4th out appeal at first.

touche

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

2009 BRD

#3 Page 13

in 2001 FED, NCAA, and PBUC all ruled that you CAN get the advantageous 4th out appeal at first.

#1. 2001, right?

#2. On what, a missed base, failure to tag up, failure to REACH a base?

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

#1. 2001, right?

#2. On what, a missed base, failure to tag up, failure to REACH a base?

WHo cares? They all said it's valid.

[jicecone]

Ok before we get to 5 pages I will succumb to Fivesdada game.

I agree

You out, you out
You mama says you out
You appealed at first and the run don't score
The inning over and der ain't no more
You out, you out.

Next thread please.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

WHo cares? They all said it's valid.

It matters.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

It matters.

Why? The persons empowered to make rules ruled. If you're doing one of their games it's official.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

Why? The persons empowered to make rules ruled. If you're doing one of their games it's official.

Sorry, those quotes are not from persons "empowered to make rules."

In two cases they are interps from people no longer making interps. And none are from people who provide interps for MLB.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

Sorry, those quotes are not from persons "empowered to make rules."

In two cases they are interps from people no longer making interps. And none are from people who provide interps for MLB.

True. Do you have something written from MLB that contradicts these interps? Until we have that, I don't see much choice other than to go with what we have, individual MLB umpires' opinions to the contrary notwithstanding.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

Sorry, those quotes are not from persons "empowered to make rules."

In two cases they are interps from people no longer making interps. And none are from people who provide interps for MLB.

They aren't? They were empowered to make interpretations. Isn't that close enough?

Do rules/laws expire when the persons passing them leave office? Not where I live.

I never said they covered MLB - I said FED, NCAA, and PBUC.

So you don't like the rulings. Evans doesn't like the MLB ruling that you can overrun first on a walk. People have differing opinions on how things should be interpreted. That doesn't mean one can ignore the official ones in the applicable venues.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

#1. 2001, right?

#2. On what, a missed base, failure to tag up, failure to REACH a base?

2008 BRD: §3

FED: OFF INTERP 2-3: Hopkins: If the defense gains a third out during play, but the batter-runner has not yet reached first at the time of the out, the defense may play on him at first for an advantageous fourth out. [email to Stevens, 5/11/01] {See 9-1-1 Ex d.}

NCAA: OFF INTERP 3-3: Fetchiet: Same as FED OFF INTERP 2-3. [Website 4/18/01, 8-6a]{See 8-6b-7}

OBR: OFF INTERP 4-3: Fitzpatrick: Same as FED. [email to cc, 1/17/01] {See 7.10}

•Play 3-3: R3, R2, 2 outs: B1 singles to the outfield but injures himself coming out of the box; he cannot continue. R3 scores easily, but R2 is thrown out at home: 3 outs. The catcher then fires to F3, who tags first in advance of B1. Ruling: The "appeal" at first results in an advantageous fourth out that cancels R3's run.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by mbyron

2008 BRD: §3

FED: OFF INTERP 2-3: Hopkins: If the defense gains a third out during play, but the batter-runner has not yet reached first at the time of the out, the defense may play on him at first for an advantageous fourth out. [email to Stevens, 5/11/01] {See 9-1-1 Ex d.}

NCAA: OFF INTERP 3-3: Fetchiet: Same as FED OFF INTERP 2-3. [Website 4/18/01, 8-6a]{See 8-6b-7}

OBR: OFF INTERP 4-3: Fitzpatrick: Same as FED. [email to cc, 1/17/01] {See 7.10}

•Play 3-3: R3, R2, 2 outs: B1 singles to the outfield but injures himself coming out of the box; he cannot continue. R3 scores easily, but R2 is thrown out at home: 3 outs. The catcher then fires to F3, who tags first in advance of B1. Ruling: The "appeal" at first results in an advantageous fourth out that cancels R3's run.

2001? I guess interps are stagnant, eh?

Apparently some major league umpires haven't read, or don't care what the BRD has to say.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

2001? I guess interps are stagnant, eh?

.

Why? Do rules have to be re-done every year?

They're in effect until changed - and these haven't.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

Why? Do rules have to be re-done every year?

I believe you quoted interpretations of rules, not rules.

They're in effect until changed - and these haven't.

They are in effect until interpreted otherwise. And according to some ML umpires, this has been done.

[UmpTTS43]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

2009 BRD

#3 Page 13

in 2001 FED, NCAA, and PBUC all ruled that you CAN get the advantageous 4th out appeal at first.

I know we have bantered about this before on another forum. I did not know that Fitzpatrick ruled that way. This is not the only interp from Fitz that has raised eyebrows. If it is the official interp, I wonder why it would not be in any other publications such as the MLBUM? This ruling is in stark contrast to other rules that define what is acceptable by appeal and the very definition of an appeal.