|
Thu Feb 27, 2003, 07:17pm
|
|||
|
|||
What?
Perhaps you've got a different 8.2.5A than I have. Mine states:
RULING: a runner may not return to a base that he left to soon on a caught fly ball if he was on or beyond a succeeding base when the ball became dead... Upon proper appeal, R1 Shall be called out. If no proper appeal is made by the defense, R1 will be awarded third base. (play involved R1 leaving 1st before the catch was made and being between 2nd and 3rd when the ball is thrown out of play ==> 1st plus 2 bases for the overthrow is ... awarded 3rd.) I don't see any way that I'm going to let the offense walk backwards around the bases during a dead ball.
__________________
"There are no superstar calls. We don't root for certain teams. We don't cheat. But sometimes we just miss calls." - Joe Crawford 
|
|
Fri Feb 28, 2003, 08:38am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What?
Quote:
|
|
Fri Feb 28, 2003, 10:50am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What?
Quote:
Note that the illegitimate return is allowed and the onus is on the defense to later appeal after the runner has completed accepting his award. Due to a ball going to DBT the official must make an award to this runner on or beyond 2B before accepting an appeal. The other issue discussed at the same time dealt with which base this runner's award would be based from. Normally, after any throw from an outfielder going to DBT the award is based from TOT. However, rule 8-3-5 also states:
So the question arises in this situation where is the award based from if the runner is not attempting return at the time the ball goes to DBT? What if the runner was continuing to third, stopped at 2B, or merely stopped in the basepath abandoning any effort to return---feeling the attempt to return was hopeless from that position. Does the action of the runner actually attempting a return determine which from which base his award will be made? The state interpreter verified with Indianapolis that, indeed, the rule is written as they desire, and the action of the runner does determine from what location the award is based. IÂ’m told, however, that Childress in interviewing McNeely directed this same question to Kyle whose response was that it would be based from TOP---period. Childress considers his interview response from McNeely as a higher source level than that of a state interpreter. Yet, Childress is also aware that the state interpreter received his response from a higher source than McNeely. So, which ruling should we accept since they are in contradiction? As for myself, until I hear further I will make my ruling based on the obvious nature of the return. That is, if itÂ’s evident that the runner obviously left 1B early, then IÂ’ll award based on TOP. If not obvious and the runner is not returning, IÂ’ll award based on TOT. IOW, IÂ’ll not allow my award to tip off the defense that a running infraction has occurred. Perhaps thatÂ’s a rogue ruling that both is and is not supported by rule and ruling, yet I feel it is the ruling that is in accordance with the spirit and intent of the rule. Although a third world play, I faced this situation last spring in a Fed tourney game when an errant throw to retire R1, who had not retouched and who remained standing on 2B, entered the 1B dugout. I awarded the runner 3B only. Although the defense was well aware of R1Â’s obvious infraction, they never later appealed. They must have felt that the award negated their right to appeal---who knowsÂ…Â…Â…Â… Freix ]
|
|
Fri Feb 28, 2003, 11:54am
|
|||
|
|||
|
I posed the same question last year, and I thought "initiating a return" was the key. Example: Abel on 1B, no outs. Baker hits a long drive to center.
Play A: Abel runs on the batted ball and rounds 2B. F8 makes a diving catch. Abel continues to 3B, and the throw to 1B to double up Abel goes into the dugout. Abel is awarded home, and the defense must appeal to put him out. In Fed, Abel could not return to touch 1B, since when the ball became dead he was on or beyond the next base after the one where he committed the infraction. In OBR, he could return, since he did not advance to another base after the ball became dead. Play B: Abel tags up on Baker's drive to center. Abel leaves 1B too soon on F8's diving catch, but nobody seems to notice the infraction. Abel touches 2B and keeps running. He slides safely into 3B, and the throw goes into the dugout. Abel is awarded home, same as above. The degree of obviousness of the infraction is irrelevant. Play C: Abel runs on Baker's blast. Abel is almost to 3B when F8 makes the diving catch. Abel initiates a return, and the throw to double him at 1B goes into the dugout. In this case, Abel gets only 3B, since he attempted to return to 1B. In OBR, his return is legal. In Fed, unless he had retouched 2B and was between 2B and 1B when the ball became dead, his return is not legal. In all cases, the defense would still have to appeal the out. The ump does not say, "Abel, you can't return." Not sure, but I thought NCAA followed OBR on this. Interesting wrinkle: Play D: Abel tags up on Baker's drive. Abel touches 2B and is almost to 3B when the defensive coach screams, "Appeal 1B. He left way too soon." Even though he tagged up properly, Abel still initiates a return and has not yet made it back to 2B when the ball becomes dead. Do we award the 2 bases from 1B or 2B? Freix: In your Fed tourney play, by giving the runner only 3B, you announced that he had left 1B too soon, even though everybody already knew it. That would be my problem with awarding only 3B in Play B above. [Edited by greymule on Feb 28th, 2003 at 11:02 AM]
__________________
greymule More whiskey—and fresh horses for my men! Roll Tide!
|
|
Fri Feb 28, 2003, 03:10pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
In your example D above, Greymule, the runner gets home (2 bases from his TOT). The exception of TOP would not apply since no infraction occurred, whether R1 thought there was or not.
IN my situation, the defense and their fans were all yelling for the ball to be thrown to 1B for appeal while everyone associated with the offense---fans, players, coaches---were yelling at R1 to return. The Cleveland City Coucil had already sent an email to R1 telling him to atttempt return. Nimrod R1 was at 2B at TOT and made no attempt whatsoever to return to 1B. IMO, at that point 1B was the obvious base of origin for the appeal, and I awarded 3B. The defensive coach came out to discuss the award. While I explained to the coach that I needed to make the award for the errant throw, he kept saying "That's not right, Steve......that's just not right." He never once mentioned appeal or that the runner left without retouching (something that was highly obvious during the play). I discussed the play with him between games as he was also playing the following game (loser's bracket). BTW, he lost by one run..........and yes, that runner scored. And while you've been thinking of plays associated with this thread, what do you do here:
Game resumes with F1 on the rubber making appeal play to 1B in which his throw to 1B goes errant, rolling down the 1B line. Is R1 allowed to return to correct his error, now that he knows he missed the base and he likely got caught with his hands in the cookie jar? Freix
|
|
Fri Feb 28, 2003, 04:20pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Supposedly, he can't go back, because of 7.01. However, that rule does stipulate, "and the pitcher assumes the pitching position," as if to say that the runner can't merely start running back because the pitcher is ready to play. If the pitcher actually does try to appeal and throws the ball away, maybe the runner can return. Never thought of that one.
__________________
greymule More whiskey—and fresh horses for my men! Roll Tide!
|
|
Sat Mar 01, 2003, 10:47pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Here's the question to the WUA:
Knowing his goose is pretty well cooked at this time, can R2 return to correct his previous baserunning error, or is he prohibited from return per rule 7.01 comment. If he cannot, what is the mechanic if R2 attempts to do so? Do you kill the ball thereby prohibiting R3 from scoring, or would you wait until the play is complete thus allowing R3 to score? And here's the response:
Thanks for your inquiry! World Umpires Association I can live with that......... I'm still not sure if I fully understand the technicalities of 7.10b other than the original play, including any return or awards, was complete on BR and the ball became dead. Therefore, no legal return allowed thereafter. Still, it somewhat surprised me that he'd allow the return of R2 (previously BR) to continue when a new play started. I thought the play would have been killed for attempting illegal return (as JEA stipulated in 7.01). Apparently Roder applies that only to meaningless returns....... I suppose the next question would be what if R2 returned to touch 1B and the defense never appealed, but R2 was unable to advance back to 2B............ My guess would be to then declare him out for illegal return...... I'm gonna get that 7.01 comment in here somewhere.....LOL Even more interesting if the double occurred with 2 outs. A defensive appeal could negate R3's run, but with no appeal, I'd end up with a run scored but then a non-force 3rd out. The $hit will hit the fan then with the defense wanting the out on the illegal return before the run scored. So, do you just leave R2 at 1B if the defense doesn't appeal???? Freix [Edited by Bfair on Mar 1st, 2003 at 09:50 PM]
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
