4th Out Appeal

[jkumpire]

Good sir,

You are almost, but not quite right right here. In the first post, the defense had left the field after the third out was made. So in this case there is no possible 4th out appeal.

Yes, the PU should point out the run scored, he should have done it as soon as the 3rd out was made. And if the defense has not left the infield, there can be an appeal on R3. But not in this case.

[pastordoug]

Yeah, I announced the run scored after the 3rd out which wasn't until iHC appealed runner leaving 1st early. It all happened rather sloppy for him because once I signaled out on the appeal his team ran off. When I announced run scored he wanted to know why? The real problem was the HC had no idea how to make an appeal and I was not going to help tell him WHO to appeal. But your right, once the defense left the field he was alll out of appeals. However, if he would have stopped his players from coming off and then appealed the runner leaving 3rd ealier I would have gotten my 4th out!!! BTW the game was over in 5 so coach wasn't upset about that run but I see now how that could become an issue in closer games.......

[soundedlikeastrike]

You can say, "you didn't appeal that runner,


I wouldn't say that.

I'd say "coach run scored before the 3rd out appeal, point at the plate and address the score keep/s, it counts. And attempt to go about my business.

Fed question.
Fed can still appeal with TO correct?
So, if the D leaves, coach finally figures it out, didn't leave the field could "he" still appeal? Or do you hold em to the defense left the field it's too late?

[mbyron]

FED has made it clear that the outcome of a play should not hinge on a coach or player not knowing the rules. Hence, with catcher's obstruction -- where the offense might have a choice of taking the obstruction or the play -- we're to bring that choice to the attention of the coach. This mechanic is different from OBR, where we enforce the catcher's "interference" penalty unless the coach requests the play.

So in a FED game, I am going to apprise the coach of the reason for the run scoring, and probably in time for him to appeal R3 leaving early. Otherwise, the offense benefits from a baserunning error solely because the coach didn't know the rule about when runs score.

I'm not sure I follow your last question: it seems to be about dead ball verbal appeals. Yes, the defense can appeal verbally when the ball is dead; but such appeals are still limited by whether the defense is on the field. Once they've left the field, no further appeals can be granted for that half inning.

By "defense leaving the field," I mean the pitcher and infielders (see PENALTY 8-2, 1-5).

[Rich Ives]

OK so the coach knew the runners didn't tag up and brought the issue to the umpire's attention.

Do you folks believe he must actually use the word "appeal" to have you call it? If so, why?

[pastordoug]

quote: "we're to bring that choice to the attention of the coach" I do not agree with this statement. I make the call "OBS" and the HC then has the option. The rules make it clear that the option is up to the "HC" to decide not the "PU." I don't "tell" the HC what he needs to do...

quote: "Do you folks believe he must actually use the word "appeal" to have you call it? If so, why? "

No but again, IMO I am not out there to "coach" the Coach... Just because the HC "knew" doesn't mean he was right. What he said was "don't the runners have to tag up?" Of coarse they do but since there were multiple runners I wasn't going to ask him which one he wanted to challenge... Why should I give the advantage to a HC who doesn't know the rules? Had the HC came over and said to me the runner on __ left eailer I would have considered that his appeal and ruled then and there. Thats not what happened. But very good point to remember.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by pastordoug

quote: "we're to bring that choice to the attention of the coach" I do not agree with this statement. I make the call "OBS" and the HC then has the option. The rules make it clear that the option is up to the "HC" to decide not the "PU." I don't "tell" the HC what he needs to do...

Don't put words in my mouth. I did NOT say we tell the coach what to do. I DID say that we tell the coach what his options are.

That instruction is directly from Kyle McNeely. If you choose to ignore it, fine, but that's official FED policy about this kind of play.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

OK so the coach knew the runners didn't tag up and brought the issue to the umpire's attention.

Do you folks believe he must actually use the word "appeal" to have you call it? If so, why?

Rich, if the coach said, "they both left early!" that would be good enough for me to rule on an appeal.

My sense from the OP is that the coach said (something like) "R1 left early!"

[PeteBooth]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

?

Rich from the OP

and goes to BU and ask "was there a catch and if so why didn't runners tag"

The coach is asking the BU "why didn't the runners tag"

IMO, that is NOT an appeal that is a question which quite frankly the BU cannot answer.

The runners most likely didn't tag up because they thought it was a NO catch.

The coach was asking a question NOT demonstrating an unmistakable appeal. If he wants to appeal, then do so.

Pete Booth

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

Rich from the OP



The coach is asking the BU "why didn't the runners tag"

IMO, that is NOT an appeal that is a question which quite frankly the BU cannot answer.

The runners most likely didn't tag up because they thought it was a NO catch.

The coach was asking a question NOT demonstrating an unmistakable appeal. If he wants to appeal, then do so.

Pete Booth

Post it all Pete - also from the OP:

"Coach says what about runners leaving earlier and I say we had no appeal... "

Maybe that could be an appeal? The whole thing's kinda murky as to what actually happpened.