Appeal Play Ruling--NCAA Rules.

[greymule]

Play: Bases loaded, one out. The batter triples. R1 missed second and the batter-runner missed first. The defense successfully appeals against the batter-runner, then R1. The appeal out of the batter-runner removes the force against R1. R1’s appealed out (third out) is not a force out; R2 and R3’s runs count. If the defense had appealed R1's' missing second as the first appeal and then the batter-runner’s missing of first, no runs would have scored since the third out was for the batter-runner not attaining first base.

Is this an official NCAA case play? If it is, then my example above would be wrong in NCAA. And so would Play 106-243 [p. 145] in my 2006 BRD, which is of course possibly out of date now. (In fact, it may even for its time have been incorrect in one particular: it asserts that in NCAA, an appeal of a runner forced at the time the play started, not at the time he missed the base, remains a force throughout the play. Some NCAA umpires on this board insisted that "at the time of the miss" was the criterion, as in Fed and OBR.)

The play given in the BRD to demonstrate "order of appeals" involves an obvious non-force and an obvious force, not a force removed because a following runner had been put out. Still, it's hard to believe that NCAA follows neither Fed nor OBR but instead follows ASA softball, in which a putout of the BR instantly and permanently removes all forces, including appeals.

[UmpTTS43]

Originally Posted by greymule

Play: Bases loaded, one out. The batter triples. R1 missed second and the batter-runner missed first. The defense successfully appeals against the batter-runner, then R1. The appeal out of the batter-runner removes the force against R1. R1’s appealed out (third out) is not a force out; R2 and R3’s runs count. If the defense had appealed R1's' missing second as the first appeal and then the batter-runner’s missing of first, no runs would have scored since the third out was for the batter-runner not attaining first base.

Is this an official NCAA case play? If it is, then my example above would be wrong in NCAA. And so would Play 106-243 [p. 145] in my 2006 BRD, which is of course possibly out of date now. (In fact, it may even for its time have been incorrect in one particular: it asserts that in NCAA, an appeal of a runner forced at the time the play started, not at the time he missed the base, remains a force throughout the play. Some NCAA umpires on this board insisted that "at the time of the miss" was the criterion, as in Fed and OBR.)

The play given in the BRD to demonstrate "order of appeals" involves an obvious non-force and an obvious force, not a force removed because a following runner had been put out. Still, it's hard to believe that NCAA follows neither Fed nor OBR but instead follows ASA softball, in which a putout of the BR instantly and permanently removes all forces, including appeals.

I am in total agreement with you. However, this is how the NCAA wants appeals to be handled. This interp came from the March meeting of conference coordinaters. It further clouds the interp that if a previous runner is put out during live play the force is still in effect.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by UmpTTS43

It further clouds the interp that if a previous runner is put out during live play the force is still in effect.

Yeah, isn't that a bit odd? Did they state any rationale for that?

[UmpTTS43]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Yeah, isn't that a bit odd? Did they state any rationale for that?

Nope

[greymule]

Maybe only live action outs on following runners remove forces on preceding runners who miss bases. If that is so, then my example (and the BRD's) would be correct, and so would the case play UmpTTS43 offered from the meeting. Both plays involve an out on the BR before the appeal on a missed 2B by the preceding R1. After the live action out on the BR, the miss of 2B is a force play; after an appeal out on the BR, the miss of 2B is not a force play.

[Is live action NCAA's term for continuous action? Aren't all appeals in NCAA during "live" action?]

Now why successful appeals on missed bases by following runners would remove forces on preceding runners, but simple putouts would not remove forces is anybody's guess.

This brings up a question:

R3, R1, one out. Batter gets a hit down the RF line. R3 scores, R1 misses 2B and proceeds to 3B. The BR misses 1B and is tagged out trying for 2B (making 2 outs).

If the live action out on the BR does not remove the force at 2B, then a simple appeal of R1's miss nullifies R3's run.

But if the out on the BR does remove the force at 2B, then even after an appeal of R1, R3's run still counts. So the defense would then have to appeal the BR's miss of 1B for the advantageous 4th out.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by greymule

If the live action out on the BR does not remove the force at 2B, then a simple appeal of R1's miss nullifies R3's run.

That's the correct NCAA interp. If there's a live action out, then the preceedig force is not removed. If there's a "dead ball" out, then the previous force is removed. IF there's a break, then multiple appeals must be executed in the correct orfer (and I think that interp is true in all codes).

[JJ]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

That's the correct NCAA interp. If there's a live action out, then the preceedig force is not removed. If there's a "dead ball" out, then the previous force is removed. IF there's a break, then multiple appeals must be executed in the correct orfer (and I think that interp is true in all codes).

Now I not only have to carry that DH card (written in that tiny type), I guess I'll have to carry one with THIS stuff on it...and hope (as I hope with the DH card) that I'll never have to pull it out and try to make sense of it.

JJ

[greymule]

and I think that interp is true in all codes

Don't tell me that even in OBR some outs remove forces and others don't!

If so, the J/R errs in saying, "If a consecutive runner has been forced to advance by reason of the batter becoming a runner, and he is forced at the moment he misses his advance base, an appeal of that is always a force out."