To uphold or deny?
 

Bunch of umpire guys kick off the season each year by have a big dinner together at a local restaurant after our FED test. Last night was that night. During the evening one umpire shared a play he had last year, and asked if he "got it right."

The play resulted in a spirited debate. I am going to post the play, and NOT tell you my opinion. I am interested in your opinions.

FED RULES: R3. Batter hits the ball out in front of the plate. R3 comes far down the line. F2 fields the ball, and sees he has a play on R3. R3 sprints back toward third base. R3 goes back into third base standing up. He actually is going back so quickly, that he cannot stop at the bag, but rather steps on third base and continues several steps past the bag, and is standing on the outfield side of the bag. R3 is clearly going to be out, except F2 throws the ball all the way to the left field corner. R3 turns around and sprints for home (remember, he is standing two good steps on the outfield side of third base). He runs completely in foul territory and never touches third base on his way home. Defense appeals that the runner missed third base.

Do you uphold or deny the appeal? FED? OBR?

lawump,

Under FED, I would sustain the appeal.

Under OBR, I would deny it.

JM

I only work under OBR so will answer based on that. Deny appeal.

Why would it be different? I would have an out in all 3 codes.

I also have two outs. Fed and OBR

I had the same theoretical situation in an OBR game a few years ago. A runner who had taken a big turn around 1B had to scramble back when a quick throw was made to the bag. He made it to 1B but couldn't stop on the bag and fell about 6 feet into foul territory. The ball got away to the fence, and in advancing to 2B the runner stepped right over 1B. The defense appealed, and I upheld the appeal. A "discussion" naturally ensued, and I held that the runner had retreated "behind" 1B and was required to touch it on the way to 2B. The offense grumbled but accepted that explanation, but I admit I wasn't sure and still am not sure. It just seemed like the right call to me.

The OP reminds me of the play in which the retreating R3 overruns 3B toward left field, and then, as he stands 10 feet past 3B down the LF line, R2 closely approaches 3B but stops 6 inches from the bag. Has R2 "passed" R3? I would say no, yet I would say that R3 still has to touch 3B on his way home.

I think the OP can be argued either way, unless there's a case play or one of the authorities has given an opinion.

bossman,

My "logic" is as follows...

Under FED I KNOW that the correct interpretation (at least this year) is that the appeal is upheld because I read the 2010 FED Interp, Situation #9 - which is essentially the same play.

Under OBR, my THINKING is that since the runner never retreated in the direction of 2B he has met his 7.02 obligation to "...touch the bases in order..." without retouching 3B and is therefore not liable to an appeal.

I can't find any interp that clarifies the question - just what I believe the rule means.

JM

How does this differ from a popup or overslide at 2B with a wild throw to the outfield. Does the runner have to retouch 2B and if not can he be appealed in FED?

I sustain the appeal in both codes. UmpJM noted that the FED 2010 Situation #9 is essentially the same thing:

<style type="text/css"> <!-- @page { margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } --> </style>

SITUATION 9: R1, on third base, attempts to score on a squeeze play. B4 attempts to bunt, but misses the pitch and F2 comes up with the ball and gets R1 in a rundown between third and home. F2 eventually attempts to throw R1 out at third, but makes a bad throw into left field. R1 steps on third, but his momentum takes him several steps down the foul line behind third base. R1, seeing the bad throw, turns, misses third base as he advances to home. After R1 has touched home plate and enters the dugout, the defense calls “Time” and verbally appeals R1 missing third.
RULING: R1 is out on the valid defensive appeal. R1 must touch third base again on his way to home
plate. (8-2-1, 8-2-6c)

In OBR, R3 must touch 3rd base again on his way to home. Whenb he over ran 3rd, he is considered between 3rd and 2nd so in order to go home, he must touch 3rd. I think that many people are trying to apply "Last Time By" but it does not apply in this case.

Oz, it somewhat applies and more so for OBR, because they talk about the runner being in the vicinity of the base. See BRD 2009 Appeals section. (don't have it at work). However, R3 last time by 3b, he did not touch and therefore can be out on appeal.

What I did not understand was the section that talked about not allowing the appeal during unrelaxed play and the runner can only be tagged. Is this when R3 stays in the vicinity of the base? Late at night is not always a good time to try and research this stuff!!!!

Take the same play (remember starting with R3), but when R3 overruns third, the defense makes a move to tag him. R3 runs directly to second, reaches it and is standing on the base when the defense tags him. Now what's your ruling?

Me? I'd have an out.

And, since R3 can't "retreat" to second, he can't "retreat past third." So, he's not required to touch third again.

Take the same play (remember starting with R3), but when R3 overruns third, the defense makes a move to tag him. R3 runs directly to second, reaches it and is standing on the base when the defense tags him. Now what's your ruling?

Me? I'd have an out.

My instinct would go the other way. I'd say that after R3 overruns 3B, he is between 3B and 2B and (1) must touch 3B on the way home, but (2) is free to retreat to 2B without touching 3B. But you might persuade me that if R3 overran on the foul side of the line, he would then have to touch 3B on his way back to 2B.

Just a slight overrun or overslide? Vicinity of the base and can go either way without touching. But I admit I'm just speculating from gut feeling. OBR authorities might well rule otherwise.

Also, it seems to me that "last time by" would apply in these cases. If R3 overran 3B down the LF line but missed 3B, and then touched 3B on the way home, he's fulfilled his obligation through "last time by."

I think the crucial premise of this reasoning is: R3 started the play having legally acquired 3B. Thus, he's not entitled during the play to retreat to 2B, which would constitute running the bases in reverse order.

Being legally entitled to 3B throughout the play, "last time by" does not apply, and R3 need not retouch 3B when he scores on the overthrow.

Interesting.

C'mon, lawump, you know in SC we don't DO appeals in FED!!! :D

Unless he is attempting to confuse the defense or make a travesty of the game, his retreat to 2nd is legal.

I see what you're getting at, but when the runner goes home, he physically steps over 3rd base (or slightly around it). When he goes to 2nd, if you draw his path on paper, he's making a "wide turn" if you look at it. I wouldn't have an out in your scenario.

dash,

I would disagree.

Once a runner legally attains a base, and the pitcher subsequently delivers a pitch (or even engages the rubber with possession of the ball in preparation to make a subsequent pitch), the runner may NOT retreat to a previous base for any reason. (7.01 Comment).

I agree with mbyron's assertion.

JM

I don't have any of my baseball books here, but from OBR:

7.01 A runner acquires the right to an unoccupied base when he touches it before he is out. He is then entitled to it until he is put out, or forced to vacate it for another runner legally entitled to that base. Rule 7.01 Comment: If a runner legally acquires title to a base, and the pitcher assumes his pitching position, the runner may not return to a previously occupied base.

I agree with UmpJM and others. Since he is an R3, he cannot retreat back to 2B so he cannot be considered between 2B and 3B. Had he been an R2, then I would uphold the appeal.

Touching the bases in order does not include the one he started from. He has already touched that one in order.

I'm interested if NCAA has an official ruling on this. If not, would they be inclined to lean towards no appeal/appeal?

In the OP, the pitcher had not assumed his pitching position when the runner retreated.

Bob - if you quoted that rule without referring to your baseball books, I am truly impressed.

Dash,

Huh?!?!!? WTF are you talking about?

In the OP, the R3 STARTS on 3B (hence, the appellation, "R3"). The pitcher then presumably pitches the ball because I don't understand how the batter could have...

if the pitcher never pitched it.

JM

Oops. You're right. Thanks for not being snotty about it.

Ok, for the record then. In Fed the runner is out on appeal because of Situation #9 ONLY. A runner is either advancing and shall touch the bases in order or returning, and shall retouch the bases in reverse order. Black and white no exceptions during live action.

In OBR there is no Situation #9 so we abide by the real rules that read quite similar to Fed, except for Situation #9.

In Fed you uphold appeal, in OBR you deny.

no must touch, no must retouch
 

B/R may run directly to 2B after running up the line past 1B.

Retouching a base is only required when runner must retreat.

Neither condition is satisfied in the OP, thus OBR is correct.

The runner advancing home and returning to 3B is not required to retouch 3B in either direction.

FED Situation 9 now requires a runner to retouch a previously occupied base before advancing to the next base. Reminds me of the FED foul ball ruling that was recently rescinded.

Bring on the lawsuits
 

It wouldn't be any different if he skirts fair territory just inside the 3rd baseline.

Appeal denied, R3 is standing on 3B at TOP. How can he miss the base?

Great thread...so what do we tell the def-coach in our OBR games when he wants the appeal? Please offer an explanation...I've read all of the posts at least twice...I'm just wondering on what grounds we can deny the appeal in OBR...the coach will want an explanation and "I saw it on officiating.com" is probably not the best one I could give him. Thank you.

Tell him there is no "missed base" because the runner could not legally retreat past 3rd. He was not obligated to touch 3rd again.

Once a runner aquires the right to a base, he has fulfilled his obligation for touching the base whether advancing or returning and therefore can not miss thed base he already touched.

In Fed? "Please read Situation #9 coach and direct all questions to NFHS, maybe they can explain it better."

The way I am understaning this now, (and I may be wrong), in the OP had the returning runner missed 3b when returning and then again when heading for home, you would still deny the appeal. If this is different please supply a reference.

For FED, R1 (on third) is out on appeal. The reference is Situation 9: "Ruling: R1 is out on the valid defensive appeal."

For all other codes: deny the appeal.

For what it is worth, the runner was called out. As was pointed out above, the runner was called out at the end of the play (and not on appeal) because we have no appeal plays in SC.

Also, for what it is worth, I have read through this thread several times and I now have doubts...but prior to this thread I definitely would have called R3 out on appeal had this occurred in a game when I was in MiLB.

Thanks for everyone's thoughts.

I was reading through some FED interps on NFHS.com last night and saw this exact play posted in there on their official 2010 interps document that has 20 sample case plays. NFHS interp states that the runner must retouch 3B or be called out on appeal.

Waaaaahuh? You mean...none?:eek: At all? For anything?

In SC under FED rules, if the umpire sees a missed base, he calls it without any defensive player/coach having to tell him. This is an old FED rule which only SC still does. In others, the defense has to at least tell the umpire before he makes a ruling. And, as you know in OBR, the defense has to tag/touch the runner/base for a ruling.

RIght -- as first noted in post #7 and as quoted in post #9.

We're discussing whether it's the "right" ruling in FED and whether it is (or should be) the same in other codes.

That topic comes up fairly often on discussion boards, that SC allows no appeals. I know that quite a few years ago this was the rule for all FED games, it was since changed and SC retained the old rule. But it always makes me wonder about something else.

When you say NO appeals, how do they handle appeals for batting out of order, which the rule book clearly labels an appeal by the defense? Or, is it that SC just doesn't allow BASERUNNING appeals?

Bretman,

Great question and pickup. Since I'm not looking at my lineup card for each batter, those issues of batting out of order must be brought to our attention by the defense (or offense, for that matter, depending on the time). So, to better answer you, yes, only on baserunning infractions.

In our state clinic last Thursday, the director of the HS League defended the continued use of this policy in SC essentially as this (and this was said in front of coaches present at the clinic) - to paraphrase, "why should kids who aren't taught the proper way to appeal, or even to appeal in the first place be penalized because they have bad coaching?" He went on to suggest some schools have coaches in place because they are the nearest warm body to put there, so the kids don't learn proper baseball rules such as appeals, so why should they be required to bring it to the attention of the umpire, when the umpire should just see it in the first place!

Yes, this is pretty much what he said, so I don't see it changing in this state anytime soon. And for the record, every school we cover in our association has pretty good coaching at all levels (1A to 4A). Nobody that I'd consider a warm body by any stretch of that definition.

I second everything that was said by scarolinablue.

Isn't it "right" until they change it?

It's official, and I'll enforce it that way.

So...let me see if I got this straight...they allow the kids to play the game and the schools to hire or assign coaches. In some cases the coaches are not interested in the game and therefor not able to teach it. Instead of letting them fail and learn from their mistakes or shut down their programs...the league administration removes provisions of the game to improve the experience for the kids...thus sending a message to formidable minds that education/learning, tradition, and rules have no place or value in high-school athletics. Do I have that right?

I played school ball in the mid-1960s. Appeals had to be with a live ball, but I don't know how closely the rule otherwise followed OBR. (We all thought we played simply under "baseball rules," which we assumed to be the same throughout the universe.) I coached HS baseball in the early 1970s, and I remember that appeals were problematic, with many players and even coaches (and umpires) not knowing how to put the ball back in play or follow other requirements. The high school I coached hired its own umpires, and so did the schools we played. The umps dressed differently. They didn't seem to represent a particular association, and I never saw an official rule book. (Our principal, Bob Kanaby, later became president of NFHS.)

I don't know when Fed took over, but I wasn't surprised when I heard that they had abolished appeals entirely (temporarily). Did Fed invent dead ball appeals to make its reinstated appeals process easier, or were dead ball appeals around earlier?

The few high school games I've attended in the past decade have been almost unbearably slow. I end up talking to other spectators and barely watching the field. So I'm for practically anything that keeps the game moving.

If umpires didn't "Call time" so often there's no need to "put the ball back in play" and make the appeal process "difficult" I'm not blaming umpires or anything...but I think that's part of why FED made the appeal process so easy and took it out of the umpire's hands (except in SC) to simply call players out on appeal w/o the defense appealing.

I see blatant misses every year for the last 5 years and not one time did the defense appeal...sometimes B/R missing 1B right in front of F3...

I think the appeal rules are pretty good for FED.

Last season I counted 33 missed bases w/out an 6 bases with appeal. The year before it was a whopping 43 to 2!

That's an amazing stat. 33 more outs...and how many more minutes of game time did those outs cost you. Very interesting post. Thanks.

I hear ya. But not my concern. My job is to grant and decide on the appeal if the defense requests it...not to draw attention to the mistake.

I think the appeal rules are pretty good for FED.

So do I. Can you imagine the chaos if Fed now switched to the OBR appeals process?

Never said we were drawing attention to anything...just commenting on what I thought was an interesting stat...one that I haven't tracked.

That's a bit of a generalization, but then again, SC does rank toward the bottom of the list on education rankings, don't we?!? :D

I don't see this as retreat to second. He legally acquired third base, but was a few feet off his base. The fact that he overran the base simply makes him liable to be tagged out while off base. However he IS "on" third, and therefore occupies it.

I once saw an MLB game where a slightly different situation occured: Batter hits ground ball and beats throw to first base. After running several feet past first base, he made a slight left turn before walking back to first base. The umpire called him out. (He may have been tagged while returning). This call drew an argument from the offensive team. The umpire ruled that he "turned" toward second.