Obscure Rule

[alanjbarnett]

I have a interesting rule question. There is a runner on 1st and 3rd, one out. The runners are off with the pitch, and the batter hits a line drive which is caught by the second baseman diving towards center field. The 2nd baseman throws to 1st to double off the runner going to second, but before the first baseman catches the ball, the runner from 3rd crosses the plate. Will the home plate umpire allow that run to score until the fielding team appeals the play? As I understand the rule, if the batter hit a fly ball in the same situation, the fielding team would be forced to appeal.

So the real question is, when will an umpire simply make the call, and when will they require the team to appeal a play.

Thanks in advance.

[Forest Ump]

Nothing obscure here. This is simply a time play. The defense made an appeal when they threw to first. The third out was not a force out. Remember I said time play earlier. Therefore the run scores because it occured before the out. The umpire will indicate at the end of playing action that one run scores.

BTW, A line drive caught and a fly ball caught are exactly the same as any caught ball.

[maven]

Forest is correct. When the defense attempts to "double off" a runner, that IS an appeal play. An appeal play is a time play: if the run scores before the out occurs, then it counts.

The rule reference (pro rules) is 4.09.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by maven

An appeal play is a time play.

In this case it is, but not always.

[maven]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

In this case it is, but not always.

If you had posted the OP, I would have added the word 'retouch' to be perfectly correct.

But then, you wouldn't have posted the OP.

[Rich Ives]

I think the original question was will R3 be allowed to score unless there is an appeal at 3B for R3's failure to retouch.

The answer is yes.

An appeal is required.

The umpire cannot just make the call - ever.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

I think the original question was will R3 be allowed to score unless there is an appeal at 3B for R3's failure to retouch.

The answer is yes.

An appeal is required.

The umpire cannot just make the call - ever.

Unless it's FED rules and the play is in South (?) Carolina where they still have the old "THe umpire will call an out for baserunning infractions" rule.

[Forest Ump]

Adding to what Rich said; They could appeal again for a 4th out appeal, that R3 left early. That would remove the run if the appeal were upheld.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by Forest Ump

Adding to what Rich said; They could appeal again for a 4th out appeal, that R3 left early. That would remove the run if the appeal were upheld.

"Again"? They didn't appeal R3 at all.

But yes - they should have additionally appealed R3 to kill the run.

[RPatrino]

Rich, they 'appealed' the runner at first leaving early. The implied appeal being the throw back to first after the catch of the line-drive.

[rbmartin]

Originally Posted by maven

when the defense attempts to "double off" a runner, that is an appeal play.

+1

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

Rich, they 'appealed' the runner at first leaving early. The implied appeal being the throw back to first after the catch of the line-drive.

I know that. That's not my issue.

They couldn't/didn't "again" appeal the runner at third because he wasn't appealed in the first place.

[maven]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

I know that. That's not my issue.

They couldn't/didn't "again" appeal the runner at third because he wasn't appealed in the first place.

Ridiculous quibble, and wrong to boot. Forest wrote, "They could appeal again for a 4th out appeal," not "They could appeal R3 again for a 4th out appeal."

Having already appealed R1, the defense would be appealing again if they also appealed R3 for an advantageous 4th out.

[Forest Ump]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

I know that. That's not my issue.

They couldn't/didn't "again" appeal the runner at third because he wasn't appealed in the first place.

What are you drinking Rich? They appealed once at 1st and I said they could appeal again , as in a second appeal, at 3rd. Sounds pretty straight forward IMO.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by Forest Ump

What are you drinking Rich? They appealed once at 1st and I said they could appeal again , as in a second appeal, at 3rd. Sounds pretty straight forward IMO.

We had different English teachers.