Lets do some more #2

[Warren Willson]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jim Porter:
Warren and Papa C,

I think you're both right.

Jaksa/Roder separates first and home from second and third in regards to appeals and relaxed versus unrelaxed action. Because of the different dynamics set up at those bases, the principles have to be a little different.

[huge snip of quality explanation]

In summation:

1. Home and first (when over-run) have slightly different dynamics. Once the runner leaves the vicinity, a tag of the base (unmistakable act of appeal) is all that is necessary for the appeal to be viable, even if the runner subsequently scrambles back.

2. First (when not over-run,) second, and third have no such limit on how far away the runner may run before scrambling back. All that matters here is, at the time of the appeal, how far removed the runner is from the suspect base.

So I say you're both right, depending on the base and situation.

I hope we can all find some agreement here.

Sincerely,
Jim Porter

---

Jim,

I'm sure we can agree, on the principles at least. I don't have a copy of J/R, and all efforts to obtain one have so far been frustrated by the exchange rate for the $AUD1.00 and the tyranny of distance.

I can readily accept that home plate [ OBR7.10(d)] and first base when overrun [OBR 7.10(c)] are quite properly treated differently from 1st base (not overrun), 2nd base and 3rd base [OBR 7.10(b)] for the purpose of appeal plays vs tag plays. The explanation you have given makes good sense to me. I am only sorry that there appears to be no definitive J/R quote on the status of Relaxed vs Unrelaxed action that covers the inability to restore Unrelaxed status at 1st base (overrun) and home plate, once it has been given up either by leaving the cutout area (home plate) or failing to "immediately" correct the miss (1st base).

Typical Porter politicking! Able to easily find the middle ground between me and Papa C.

Cheers, mate.

Warren Willson

------------------
Member and Co-Moderator, UT