d-backs/padres ending

[rulesmaven]

Extra innings. Just ended a few seconds ago. Bases loaded two out, bottom of the 10th, tied. Batter walks. Runner on second base runs from second directly toward dugout instead of toward third. He's well on to the infield grass when the runner from third touches home.

Umpires caucus for a long time. It's unclear whether the runner tried to run back from the dugout to third. Announcers had no idea what the rule is. What is the rule?

(After consultation, they counted the run and ended the game.)

Edit: Watching post-game. Umps still in dugout discussing. Fans have left.

[Larry1953]

Very similar play to the one I brought up in a thread several weeks ago. Butch Wynegar took a bases loaded ball four that was a wild pitch. He did not go to first and joined in the celebration at the plate. The theory was that if the B/R makes the third out at first, a run cannot score.

Back then the ump said the wild pitch took precedence over the walk so the run stood.

This play was not a force out. The runner on third was entitled to home by the bases loaded walk. Could have been another Merkel Boner though.

I think I heard Bud Black protested the decision. It sounds like they appealed to third in which case it was a timing play and the run had crossed the plate by that time. I guess it could be argued that an out could be called for abandonment and when that out could have been called before the run scored.

[Rich Ives]

Try reading 4.09(b) - all the way through.

[rulesmaven]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

Try reading 4.09(b) - all the way through.

Baseball is not my game, and your rules make my head hurt. The first parts of the rule seem relatively clear -- run counts unless the runner from third declines to run home or the BR does not promptly touch first. (Unless there is some fan interference.) Seems to cover the situation.

Then I get to stuff like this and it's where y'all lose me: "When a runner misses a base and a fielder holds the ball on a missed base, or on the base originally occupied by the runner if a fly ball is caught, and appeals for the umpire's decision, the runner is out when the umpire sustains the appeal; all runners may score if possible, except that with two out the runner is out at the moment he misses the bag, if an appeal is sustained as applied to the following runners."

As I read this, it relates to the timing of when the out at third occurs, which apparently can occur in some cases when the appeal is granted and in others when the base was missed, although the "as applied to the following runners" is as clear as mud to me. But as I understand it, it all is irrelevant if the runner from third touched home and the BR touched first. (Which seems consistent with how the crew chief handled it, because he seemed to go directly to the first base U.)

Originally Posted by Larry1953

I think I heard Bud Black protested the decision. It sounds like they appealed to third in which case it was a timing play and the run had crossed the plate by that time. I guess it could be argued that an out could be called for abandonment and when that out could have been called before the run scored.

They said on the telecast that he did in fact protest, based on the explanation he was given, whatever that means. There did appear to be an appeal at third, though the appeal was well after the runner from third touched home. It is unclear to me from the rule quoted above when and whether the out can be declared earlier than the appeal in this situation, but if it matters, at the time the runner from third touched home, the runner from second had taken a direct line from second base toward the third base dug out, and was on the infield grass. I don't know whether this is enough to be declared out on an advance on a walk -- he clearly had not left the field or anything and easily could have taken a right hand turn and run toward third if he'd wanted to. The 3BU did not make any kind of mechanic to signal an out before the run scored.

[bob jenkins]

An out for abandoment is NEVER a force play, by interpretation, in MLB (and MiLB, I think).

Some think the interp should be changed and/or the rule should be clarified.

[mbyron]

Under OBR R3 needs to touch the plate and BR needs to touch 1B. R1 and R2 can do what they like. Sounds as if that's what happened.