The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sun Apr 08, 2012, 11:14am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 1,577
Runner must touch base?

Would the right word, abandonment, have changed the outcome?

Padres protest accepted, then withdrawn.

Padres withdraw protest over D-backs' walk-off | padres.com: News

Padres protested the runner must touch third base. Denied due to 4.09b. Not that I disagree with the 4.09b, nor allowing a run to score AFTER the third out was made after BOB awards.

But allowing the runner to run off the baseline and to apply no penalty on the runner when he should touch the next base, should matter. Someone on the Padres might call this a clear case of abandonment, before the run legally scored.

Clarification needed why the third out, inconsequential as it may be, was not granted.
__________________
SAump

Last edited by SAump; Sun Apr 08, 2012 at 12:06pm.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sun Apr 08, 2012, 12:53pm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lakeside, California
Posts: 6,724
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAump View Post
Would the right word, abandonment, have changed the outcome?

Padres protest accepted, then withdrawn.

Padres withdraw protest over D-backs' walk-off | padres.com: News

Padres protested the runner must touch third base. Denied due to 4.09b. Not that I disagree with the 4.09b, nor allowing a run to score AFTER the third out was made after BOB awards.

But allowing the runner to run off the baseline and to apply no penalty on the runner when he should touch the next base, should matter. Someone on the Padres might call this a clear case of abandonment, before the run legally scored.

Clarification needed why the third out, inconsequential as it may be, was not granted.
They must have withdrawn the protest because somebody told them they were wrong. The only two requirements are that the runner from 3rd touch home plate and the batter-runner touch first base. What R1 and R2 do is of NO consequence. They are not required to touch the next base. Please show me where 4.09 (b) mentions R1 or R2. Clear case of abandonment? Here we go again!
__________________
Matthew 15:14, 1 Corinthians 1:23-25
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Mon Apr 09, 2012, 01:02am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 755
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAump View Post
Montero had failed to touch the next base, once before. Coincidence?

All Top Plays | SD@ARI: Bass tags out Montero on a play at the plate - Video | padres.com: Multimedia

If R1 or R2 joined the celebration prior to the touch of home plate, would you rule that one of them may have been guilty of passing another runner on the baseline. Would that cancel the run?
I think you linked to the wrong video.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon Apr 09, 2012, 01:55pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 283
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAump View Post
But allowing the runner to run off the baseline and to apply no penalty on the runner when he should touch the next base, should matter.
This is the crux of your problem. You believe it should matter, but the rules do not support your belief. Rather than re-examine your belief, you look for whatever evidence can be read out of context or otherwise twisted to support that belief. There's a name for that.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon Apr 09, 2012, 03:10pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Is this really unclear?

"We wanted all runners to touch their bases," Black said Saturday. "But we were told that only the runner [on third] has to touch home and the batter has to touch first."

It was at that point that Black informed the crew chief Tim Welke that he was playing the game under protest.

The protest didn't have much merit, though, as baseball rule 4.09 (b) states that "... the umpire shall not declare the game ended until the runner forced to advance from third base has touched home base and the batter-runner has touched first base."
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon Apr 09, 2012, 06:00pm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lakeside, California
Posts: 6,724
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder View Post
Is this really unclear?

"We wanted all runners to touch their bases," Black said Saturday. "But we were told that only the runner [on third] has to touch home and the batter has to touch first."

It was at that point that Black informed the crew chief Tim Welke that he was playing the game under protest.

The protest didn't have much merit, though, as baseball rule 4.09 (b) states that "... the umpire shall not declare the game ended until the runner forced to advance from third base has touched home base and the batter-runner has touched first base."
Black thinks he's a genius. He has lost every time he protests. Padres are a friggin joke already this season. I've already stop caring or watching.
__________________
Matthew 15:14, 1 Corinthians 1:23-25
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Sat Apr 14, 2012, 12:52am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 1,577
Obstinate?

Given the last successful protest took place in 1986, no current manager would qualify as having very much success.

Say that R2 had been called out for abandonment before or after R3 reaches home, does the run score? Yes, because each runner was awarded one base immediately after the ball was caught and ball four was called. Base running was merely a formality the rulebook requires from each participant. R3 touched home, R2 touched second and BR touched first. Ballgame, score run.

Anyone notice R2 failed to touch 3B? Yes, which is why the Padres protested. Their protest, valid or not, would not wipe that run off the board. That third out was meaningless to either team. AZ wins, SD loses. The umpires knew that and signaled SAFE, knowing R2 failed to touch 3rd base.

Abandonment deals with game ending situations that require all runners to reach each base successfully. Without the JR interpretations, abandonment only applies to game ending two out, HR situations where the only decision is how many runs will score. It is doubtful now that abandonment has any real connotation here and it will simply disappear from the baseball lexicon over time.

This is not an appeal play. Are there any other abandonment situations left, that are not supported by a mere appeal by way of defensive tag or touch of base? The bold rulebook phrase no longer has any meaning.
__________________
SAump

Last edited by SAump; Sat Apr 14, 2012 at 12:53pm.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Sat Apr 14, 2012, 11:31am
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lakeside, California
Posts: 6,724
And your point is?
__________________
Matthew 15:14, 1 Corinthians 1:23-25
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Sat Apr 14, 2012, 12:09pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 1,577
A subsequent out is not possible?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve View Post
And your point is?
Well what about a subsequent out that allows one to wipe off the run? My point is that abandonment is not recognized as a subsequent out in this case. Then abandonment never really existed to support any out on the base path. Simply a myth that never existed within the written rules of the game.
__________________
SAump

Last edited by SAump; Sat Apr 14, 2012 at 12:12pm.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Does not touch first base Zoochy Baseball 15 Tue Jul 06, 2010 07:13pm
Runner returning to touch missed base ncaaumpdj Softball 2 Mon Mar 08, 2010 11:52am
must obstructed runner physically touch base? Tru_in_Blu Softball 18 Sun Jan 17, 2010 05:13pm
runner returning to touch base shipwreck Softball 15 Fri Mar 29, 2002 09:14am
Base touch responsibilities Roger Greene Softball 2 Thu Mar 01, 2001 09:58pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:46am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1