Abandonment 7.08(a)
 

This rule also covers the following and similar plays: Less than two out, score tied last of ninth inning, runner on first, batter hits a ball out of park for winning run, the runner on first passes second and thinking the home run automatically wins the game, cuts across diamond toward his bench as batter-runner circles bases. In this case, the base runner would be called out “for abandoning his effort to touch the next base” and batter-runner permitted to continue around bases to make his home run valid. If there are two out, home run would not count (see Rule 7.12). This is not an appeal play.

OK, the question is, what are other "similar" plays? - with a wink and a nod to the D-back/Padres thread. Notice that with less than 2 out, the abandonment out call is made so that the B/R is not called out for passing the runner and can still get credit for the HR. But with two outs, the HR does not count.

So if something silly like this occurs on the basepaths BEFORE R3 touches home on the bases loaded walk, would that be a timed third out that could negate the run? Note the rule book stresses that it is NOT an appeal play - meaning that it is a judgment out call by the umpire. A similar play could be runners passing each other R1, R2, B/R in their zeal to celebrate before R3 legally scores.

The run doesn't score in the first play becasue the third out is by a preceeding runner.

I would have the run score in the last play under the same theory as when R2 passes third and is then tagged out before R3 scores.

I think this thread is going to be called out for abandonment.

You've been away for a while..... this guy pulls this stuff all the time. He focuses on a rule - usually an obscure one - then pushes play after play into it and people on this forum keep answering him and getting into arguments about these ridiculous plays he comes up with.

Abandoning common sense? :D

No it doesn't. No it's not. And no.

Please just trust me ... if you've called abandonment more than once in your career, you are likely misusing the rule.

And no, I'm not going to reply to the rebuttal. Abandonment almost always equals, "Something weird just happened, I don't know what to call, I want an out so ... Abandonment!!"

I know he does, but I was just trying to add a little levity.:)

Ozzy, I think that is a fair criticism. But remember, some of these ridiculous plays are actually happening at the MLB level. Abandonment was called on the BoSox R3 for entering the scrum. And the D-Backs R2 came close to pulling a Merkle and the crew conferenced about it for quite a while to make sure he didn't.

You are quite correct. I am not an umpire, just a handful of LL games years ago that taught me how hard the job really is. Fans just don't appreciate the skills involved. Participating on this forum has really opened my eyes to see how good you guys really are.

Whatever, that is the spirit behind my posts, as annoying as they may be.

OK, this situation may seem ridiculous, but it really happened in Harvey Haddix gem. R1 and R2 with one out. Adcock hits HR but R1 Hank Aaron thinks it was a GRD hopping over the fence. Aaron touched second but peeled off to go to the dugout. Adcock was ultimately called out for passing Aaron and only got credit for a double with the game ending 1-0 instead of 3-0.

I quoted 7.08 directly from the rulebook. It would seem very strange for an R1 (only) to think he didn't have to touch the plate to have his run count. It is reasonable to see why Aaron did what he did. I don't know when this wording came about. But say it was there for the Haddix game. If it was, then the score could have been 2-0. Moreover, if there were 2 outs and Aaron abandoned the based before R2 Mantilla scored, it is conceivable that ALL the runs could have been negated according to what is specifically mention about a "ridiculous" situation - they even said "similar" situations - goodness only knows what they meant by that.

Larry,

Have you considered Twitter?

Seems right up your alley.

Just a thought.

JM

Coach, that has been suggested before but I'm just too verbose for that. :-)

Yes, Twitter doesn't allow anybody to ramble on. Short and sweet is the order of the day over there.

Tried to PM you, Larry, but it won't let me... so sorry if this is put in the public readosphere.

I think you would be well served to remember the purpose of this forum. It seems that some of the topics out there are designed to force an argument (you even said, as one of your reasons for posting ... "because I knew it would rile you up")

Arguments may come along on the forum - probably more than most like... but that is not why we come here. MOST of us come here to talk about situations (real ones), rules, mechanics, heck --- even equipment sometimes --- with the goal of becoming better umpires. This is not a political forum or the comments section at the bottom of an opinion op-ed. Please keep that in mind when deciding to start a thread.

Also - it would help you in the long run if you didn't use, as backup for your opinion, that "the announcers of the Pirates broadcast said so" or the like. The talking heads are generally hated here, mostly because they spout off nonsense that sheep then believe and quote (so don't be a sheep!) - and they have no clue what the rules or mechanics are, even though they speak from a seeming background of authority. To put it most bluntly... if a TH agrees with you, that's probably NEGATIVE points for your argument.

Not posting this to start an argument or make you angry. Honestly posting this in hopes it helps. I see you on the precipice of trolldom and I'm hoping this causes you to turn rather than jump.