appeal play

[celebur]

He wasn't being sarcastic--he was trying to point you to the rules basis so that you could figure it out for yourself, which will likely stick with you better than if he had just answered, "No."

Edit: By the way, you didn't mention a rule set, so assuming OBR, this would be rule 4.09a, which I'll quote below:

4.09 HOW A TEAM SCORES

(a) One run shall be scored each time a runner legally advances to and touches first, second, third and home base before three men are put out to end the inning.
EXCEPTION: A run is not scored if the runner advances to home base during a play in which the third out is made (1) by the batter-runner before he touches first base; (2) by any runner being forced out; or (3) by a preceding runner who is declared out because he failed to touch one of the bases.

Your play exactly matches exception #3.

[UmpJM]

steveshane67,

If you're too lazy to look it up yourself there's no reason to accuse bob of being a "wise a$$" or suggesting he is "firmly affixed to (his) high horse" - because he's not.

You might want to read Rule 7.12 .

JM

[steveshane67]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

steveshane67,

If you're too lazy to look it up yourself there's no reason to accuse bob of being a "wise a$$" or suggesting he is "firmly affixed to (his) high horse" - because he's not.

You might want to read Rule 7.12 .

JM

did it ever occur to you that someone might have tried to search for it but didnt see it and didnt feel like thoroughly reading through 13 pages of rules (sec 7 is 13 pages) when they could spend 5 seconds posting a question on a rules forum.

[UmpJM]

Originally Posted by steveshane67

did it ever occur to you that someone might have tried to search for it but didnt see it and didnt feel like thoroughly reading through 13 pages of rules (sec 7 is 13 pages) when they could spend 5 seconds posting a question on a rules forum.

steveshane,

Yes, it did.

You're welcome.

JM

[johnnyg08]

Or you could go to MLB.com which has fully searchable pdf's for your reading pleasure.

[johnnyg08]

another way to ask your question is to post a few rules that you already looked up and couldn't figure them out. you'll get a lot more credit on here for at least attempting to do some leg work on your own first.

yes, it is faster sometimes to just ask on here...but many on here will teach you to fish as well. I've always learned more when I read about the rule and the ridiculous amount of manuals I've purchase over the last few years.

lighten up on Bob...it's good to make friends on here

[steveshane67]

Originally Posted by johnnyg08

another way to ask your question is to post a few rules that you already looked up and couldn't figure them out. you'll get a lot more credit on here for at least attempting to do some leg work on your own first.

yes, it is faster sometimes to just ask on here...but many on here will teach you to fish as well. I've always learned more when I read about the rule and the ridiculous amount of manuals I've purchase over the last few years.

lighten up on Bob...it's good to make friends on here

maybe im missing something.

my post was a simple yes or no question that should be a very easy question for any baseball ump to answer with a simple yes or no.

as you can see by my first followup post, i have nothing to do with the question, i was simply trying to help someone else out, bc i knew of this forum, and i knew it was a simple yes or no question.

i dont play baseball, i dont umpire baseball, heck, i hardly even watch baseball, so, i dont care about pouring over the rulebook, or purchasing manuals.

[johnnyg08]

Originally Posted by steveshane67

maybe im missing something.

my post was a simple yes or no question that should be a very easy question for any baseball ump to answer with a simple yes or no.

as you can see by my first followup post, i have nothing to do with the question, i was simply trying to help someone else out, bc i knew of this forum, and i knew it was a simple yes or no question.

i dont play baseball, i dont umpire baseball, heck, i hardly even watch baseball, so, i dont care about pouring over the rulebook, or purchasing manuals.

I really don't care either way what you think or what you choose to purchase or not purchase. If you want help on this board, I'm simply giving you advice just like some of the other veterans on here. Take it or leave it, makes no difference to me

[UmpJM]

Originally Posted by steveshane67

...

i dont play baseball, i dont umpire baseball, heck, i hardly even watch baseball, so, i dont care about pouring over the rulebook, or purchasing manuals.

steve,

Have you considered coaching? Sounds like you're eminently qualified.

JM

[DG]

Originally Posted by steveshane67

i dont play baseball, i dont umpire baseball, heck, i hardly even watch baseball, so, i dont care about pouring over the rulebook, or purchasing manuals.

So why the hell are you on this site asking simple questions that can be easily researched by someone who does care and complaining about answers received? Wrong place to play with your attitude.

[steveshane67]

Originally Posted by johnnyg08

Or you could go to MLB.com which has fully searchable pdf's for your reading pleasure.

thats where i originally tried to search. the problem was i searched for "missed", as in missed base, when the MLB rule talks about failure to touch. the only pertinent runner rule with "missed" doesnt address the appeal being the 3rd out and following runners runs not counting.

but thanks again.

i just wonder why this post

Does not touch first base

received nothing but legit helpful responses, but mine didnt?

i even know the answer to the question.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by steveshane67

i just wonder why this post

Does not touch first base

received nothing but legit helpful responses, but mine didnt?

i even know the answer to the question.

Sometimes it depends on who answers first.

I will point out that a follow-up question in that thread elicited the following response: "I and most on this forum could easily tell you but I listed the rule from the book in post #2. See if you can figure it out. Learn on your own and it will be much clearer for you. "

That's similar to the advice you received.

i dont play baseball, i dont umpire baseball, heck, i hardly even watch baseball, so, i dont care about pouring over the rulebook, or purchasing manuals.

Ah -- most to whom that description applies include that information in the OP. Had that been the case, I would have realized you were not interested in fishing, and just given you the information to take back.

[steveshane67]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Sometimes it depends on who answers first.

I will point out that a follow-up question in that thread elicited the following response: "I and most on this forum could easily tell you but I listed the rule from the book in post #2. See if you can figure it out. Learn on your own and it will be much clearer for you. "

That's similar to the advice you received.


(If I was being sarcastic, I'd wonder why you didn't read that thread first and then read the rule referenced therein. But, I'm not, so I won't.)

maybe that was the 100% best thread reference i could have used, BUT, i looked at the first page of the forum, saw what seemed to be a relatively easy question, read the first few responses and noted how they all were legitimate, and stopped reading the thread bc i wasnt looking for words of wisdom, just a thread were ppl were given real answers to a simple question.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by steveshane67

did it ever occur to you that someone might have tried to search for it but didnt see it and didnt feel like thoroughly reading through 13 pages of rules (sec 7 is 13 pages) when they could spend 5 seconds posting a question on a rules forum.

Steve --

1) My original response was offered in the spirit of the "give a man a fish...teach a man to fish" saying.

2) You'd be surprised what else you can learn by looking through the "13 pages" of rules.

[steveshane67]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Steve --

1) My original response was offered in the spirit of the "give a man a fish...teach a man to fish" saying.

2) You'd be surprised what else you can learn by looking through the "13 pages" of rules.

thats lovely.

if i asked "if the batter missed third base on a HR, would the other runners on base runs count" would that receive a cryptic sarcastic reply as well?

the reason i ask is bc i would assume the answer would be no, and that an actual response, maybe with a rule mixed in, would be given. thus one could only deduce that a certain "obscure" rulebook question threshold would have to be crossed to receive a straight answer. which would lead me to ask why my original question was deemed so mundane that it couldnt be answered legitimately.