BOO & Continuous Action

[bob jenkins]

Clearly in FED, UmpJM has the correct answer. A similar question was on the FED Part 1 exam this year.

[UmpTTS43]

He is also correct concerning OBR and NCAA.

[UmpJM]

UmpTT,

I've always preferred the "cleaner language" of the NCAA rule:

(2) If the improper batter becomes a base runner or is put out and an appeal is made to the umpire-in-chief before a pitch to the next
batter of either team, or a play or attempted play, the proper batter is
declared out and all runners return to bases held before action by the
improper batter. ...

It plainly state that the improper batter completing his at bat is what matters, and does not even indirectly suggest the umpire tread the slippery slope of causality.

I believe the OBR rule "means" the same thing, but I can't prove it.

JM

[UmpTTS43]

You can delineate your assertion through their ambiguous verbiage.

[jicecone]

Ok, we have managed to use a lot of words here and I am somewhat confused. I have R2's advance during Charles at bat, (the fact that the wild pitch was ball four is irrelavant) being attributed as a result of the wild pitch. Therefore R2 would remain at third in accordance with Fed 7-1-1 last sentence of paragraph on pg 42. Fed only. Sit.1 of the original op.

[UmpJM]

Originally Posted by jicecone

Ok, we have managed to use a lot of words here and I am somewhat confused. I have R2's advance during Charles at bat, (the fact that the wild pitch was ball four is irrelavant) being attributed as a result of the wild pitch. Therefore R2 would remain at third in accordance with Fed 7-1-1 last sentence of paragraph on pg 42. Fed only. Sit.1 of the original op.

jicecone,

According to the OP, the R2 did NOT advance during the improper batter's at bat.

He advanced after the improper batter had completed his at bat and had become a runner.

Yes, on that point, I am absolutely "certain sure".

JM

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

jicecone,

According to the OP, the R2 did NOT advance during the improper batter's at bat.

He advanced after the improper batter had completed his at bat and had become a runner.

Yes, on that point, I am absolutely "certain sure".

JM

OK, I understand where your coming from. Not convinced yet either way, wether I agree or disagree because of the very fine line here but, I understand.

[Chris Viverito]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

jicecone,

According to the OP, the R2 did NOT advance during the improper batter's at bat.

He advanced after the improper batter had completed his at bat and had become a runner.

Yes, on that point, I am absolutely "certain sure".

JM

I think "while he is at bat" is being taken too literally. I interpret this as a reference to when a runner advances because the IB is awarded a base or advances the runners on a batted ball. Literally - the runner should be returned. By interpretation - he does not.

That this is R2 advancing on a passed ball his advancement stands. If I am the umpire - I am not returning him. The IB did not advance him.