Must the Runner Clearly beat the ball to the bag???

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by mbyron

The problem is that OBR contains two contrary statements. One is 6.05(j):

"A batter is out when...After a third strike or after he hits a fair ball, [the batter] or first base is tagged before he touches first base."

By this test, the ball must beat the runner, so a "tie" would go to the runner.

The other is 7.01 (already quoted by dash, above)

"7.01 A runner acquires the right to an unoccupied base when he touches it before he is out."

By this test, the runner must beat the ball, so a "tie" would result in an out.

This is one of the 237 problems with OBR. By tradition, at every level the test implied in 7.01 is employed on the field: the runner must beat the ball.

FED rules do not contain the contraries: see 8-4-2(j).

7.08 (e) "Any runner is out when he fails to reach the next base before a fielder tags him or the base, after he has been forced to advance by reason of the batter becoming a runner." supports 7.01, although it does not include the batter/runner.

Therefore, by rule, tie goes to the fielder, except for the batter/runner at first base.

Right.

[jicecone]

"Tie goes to the umpire", his butt is out.

[Texas Aggie]

Notice the rule references:

[the batter] or first base is tagged before he touches first base

and

he touches it before he is out

are NOT inconsistent. The first talks about when the timing of a tag (or base touch), while the second talks about the timing of the out. The out is a (possible) result, but not the equivalent of, a touch/tag.

I'm sure they could be worded better.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

7.08 (e) "Any runner is out when he fails to reach the next base before a fielder tags him or the base, after he has been forced to advance by reason of the batter becoming a runner." supports 7.01, although it does not include the batter/runner.

Therefore, by rule, tie goes to the fielder, except for the batter/runner at first base.

Right.

I agree that 7.08 fits with 7.01. They're both inconsistent with 6.05(j), which I've suggested is disregarded in practice. To conclude that "by rule" the situation is clear is to deny the existence of 6.05.

As I read them, 7.08 and 7.01 are more general than 6.05, since they pertain to all runners, not just the batter-runner.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

Notice the rule references:



and



are NOT inconsistent. The first talks about when the timing of a tag (or base touch), while the second talks about the timing of the out. The out is a (possible) result, but not the equivalent of, a touch/tag.

I'm sure they could be worded better.

Of course they're inconsistent. They would only be consistent if something other than a tag could cause an out (in a relevant play).

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I agree that 7.08 fits with 7.01. They're both inconsistent with 6.05(j), which I've suggested is disregarded in practice. To conclude that "by rule" the situation is clear is to deny the existence of 6.05.

As I read them, 7.08 and 7.01 are more general than 6.05, since they pertain to all runners, not just the batter-runner.

Well, 6.05 (j) is only pertinent to the batter/runner, so the rules are inconsistent only with respect to him. 7.08 (e) does not apply to all runners - the batter/runner is excluded.

I agree that 6.05 (j) is disregarded in practice.

[johnnyg08]

The term "batter/runner" piece was added to the rules years after...if what I've read.

I guess if you want longer games and want to give "ties to the runner" you're perpetuating a myth that most umpires on here do not follow...and if that's the case...it might be something to reconsider

[UmpTTS43]

Wow, inconsistencies in the rule book? Go figure.

Bottom line is that the runner has to beat the tag of the base and ties go to the umpire.