Force play or time play?

[johnnyg08]

I think what somebody else is saying is that the runner can't be out twice can he?

So you can't tag R1 out for being off of the base, and then appeal the same runner? Is that correct? I don't know, that's why I'm asking. Thanks.

[UmpTTS43]

Sure he can. BR misses 1st and is tagged out at third. The first time he is out is on the tag. He is also out on appeal for missing 1st. Runner is still out, but for different reasons.

[Dave Reed]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

J/R has a nearly identical play (except with R1 & R3 instead of R1 & R2). The tag of R1 - who is returning to 2nd base to correct his baserunning error - is neither an appeal nor a force out, and it's a time play at the plate.

What I can't understand is: J/R says a subsequent appeal of R1's miss is not allowed. Why not? The tag of R1 is certainly part of the continuous action caused by and following the batted ball (how can it NOT be if there is a time play at the plate), so, according to MLBUM and everyone else, the defense does not lose it's right to appeal R1's miss.

My J/R is from 2004, and a nearly similar play is on page 84, the last page of Section 10 Appeals. In the 2004 edition, J/R allow the appeal for the 4th out. So apparently dash has a newer edition of J/R which has a changed ruling.

I haven't seen anything in the MLBUM about the subject. But consider the actual rule: (From 7.10(d))
Appeal plays may require an umpire to recognize an apparent “fourth out.” If the third out is made during a play in which an appeal play is sustained on another runner, the appeal play decision takes precedence in determining the out. If there is more than one appeal during a play that ends a half-inning, the defense may elect to take the out that gives it the advantage.

The rule taken as written says that R1 can not be appealed for a 4th out, because he is the runner who made the 3rd out, and is therefore not "another" runner.

So my question is: Can anyone quote an authority (other than an old J/R interp) which says that once R1 has been tagged for the third out, he can be appealed for a 4th out because he missed 2nd ?

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by Dave Reed

My J/R is from 2004, and a nearly similar play is on page 84, the last page of Section 10 Appeals. In the 2004 edition, J/R allow the appeal for the 4th out. So apparently dash has a newer edition of J/R which has a changed ruling.

I haven't seen anything in the MLBUM about the subject. But consider the actual rule: (From 7.10(d))
Appeal plays may require an umpire to recognize an apparent “fourth out.” If the third out is made during a play in which an appeal play is sustained on another runner, the appeal play decision takes precedence in determining the out. If there is more than one appeal during a play that ends a half-inning, the defense may elect to take the out that gives it the advantage.

The rule taken as written says that R1 can not be appealed for a 4th out, because he is the runner who made the 3rd out, and is therefore not "another" runner.

So my question is: Can anyone quote an authority (other than an old J/R interp) which says that once R1 has been tagged for the third out, he can be appealed for a 4th out because he missed 2nd ?

Dave - that's an interesting point about "another" runner from 7.10 (d). I couldn't find anything about that in the MLBUM, and none of the examples of successful appeals entails an advantageous 4th out against a runner who is already out.

However, J/R specifically addresses it in Chapter 6 -- Runner or Batter-Runner Out, Not Out (citing the same rule!):

"After any given pitch, and before the next pitch, a runner can be out only once, although an advantageous fourth out against a runner already out can supersede the earlier out. [7.10d]"

My J/R is the Twelfth Edition (2008). I wonder what caused them to change the ruling and deny the appeal. Maybe it needs to be un-changed.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Dave Reed

But consider the actual rule: (From 7.10(d))
Appeal plays may require an umpire to recognize an apparent “fourth out.” If the third out is made during a play in which an appeal play is sustained on another runner, the appeal play decision takes precedence in determining the out. If there is more than one appeal during a play that ends a half-inning, the defense may elect to take the out that gives it the advantage.

The word "another" is, I think, one of the 234 errors identified by Evans in OBR.

[DG]

If defense tags R1 and says nothing as they run off I have a run scored. If they tag him and then say he missed 2nd base I have a missed base appeal and no run scored.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by DG

If defense tags R1 and says nothing as they run off I have a run scored. If they tag him and then say he missed 2nd base I have a missed base appeal and no run scored.

According to J/R, that would not be a valid appeal because the action is unrelaxed.

[jicecone]

"An appeal should be clearly intended as an appeal, either by a verbal request by the player or an act that unmistakably indicates an appeal to the umpire"

Given the rulebook language quoted above and not having a copy of JR, how is the runner returning to second any different then the runner returning on a tag up or missing home plate. They are both unrelaxed actions and both appealable errors. How does JR justify this . Or am I missing something.