R1, R3 double steal

[Lapopez]

A few weeks ago a fellow named Manny A. brought up the following play on Eteamz in order to illustrate the definition of “play”.

Manny wrote: “If you insist on an example for "play or attempted play", try this one: R1 and R3, no outs. R1 takes off for second. F2 catches the pitch, and throws it hard back to F1 in an attempt to fool R3 that he is throwing out R1. F1 catches the throw, sees that R3 started going for home and is now trying to head back to third, and he throws over to third base. The ball eludes F5 and goes into the stands. At the time of F1's throw, R1 had already reached second base. Where do you place the runners and why?”

Manny’s answer: “So F1's throw to F5 to retire R3 is an initial play in this sequence, not a subsequent play. By 7.05(g), runners get two bases from the Time of Pitch. That means R1 goes no further than third base, regardless if he reached second or not before the throw.”

When I first read the play, it seemed pretty straight forward, and I awarded R1 home. I already knew the concept of “play” but thought it was irrelevant. I thought first play/second play by an infielder only applied to a batted ball. So did a fellow named Will Bumgardner. But it was quickly pointed out to Will that 7.05(g) has no such requirement. I reread 7.05(g) and agreed. Then Will pointed out the comment to 7.05(g): "If an unusual play arises where a first throw by an infielder goes into stands or dugout but the batter did not become a runner (such as catcher throwing ball into stands in attempt to get runner from third trying to score on passed ball or wild pitch) award of two bases shall be from the position of the runners at the time of the throw. (For the purpose of Rule 7.05 (g) a catcher is considered an infielder.)"

This was never addressed in the thread. I’m with Will here. I still have R1 scoring. Although I agree with Manny that this is a good illustration of a “play”, by showing that the catcher’s throw back to the pitcher is not a “play”, in this situation it has no bearing on the outcome due to the comment pointed out by Will. Agree?