Safe on 2nd, goes back to 1st
 

OBR. But I'd like to see the FED rule.

R1 & R2. Double steal, F1 throws to F5 on a pickoff attempt. R2 caught in a rundown goes back to 2nd. R1 arrives at 2nd. R1 called out. R2 thinking he is out jogs toward the dugout. 1st base coach tells R2 the ball is live and to get on the bag at first. R2 arrives safely at 1st and remains there for the next pitch.

I looked up "running bases in reverse order" on the internet, because they can't put anything on the internet that isn't true (insert sarcasm emoticon here). I was surprised to find the word "myth" come up often. That very scenario was allowed in Milwaukee Friday night. Since I broadcast high school games, in the unlikely event I see something similar, would running back to first after legally acquiring second be allowed in FED rules?

In both pro and HS (FED) rules running the bases in reverse order is only illegal if done to confuse the defense or to make a travesty. Neither was the case here.

If just running in reverse order was illegal you couldn't have a rundown.

True. But in this case, R2 started at second base on the pitch. He cannot legally return to first base when play is complete.

Of course, I'm assuming by "R1 and R2", he meant that R2 was the runner who started out at second base, and not at first base. That's how I understood it, based upon his description of what happened.

I'm not sure what the FED rule is, but in OBR, it's the Rule 7.01 Comment.

My take: It was a new play. The clock starts over.

It was, Manny. R1 on first base, R2 on second base. My apologies if that is wrong and caused confusion.

That's right, and I think both the Cubs and the umpires got it wrong

Hypothetical situation;

Nobody on, nobody out. B1 hits a clean double and after play has ceased, stupid B1 walks off second base toward the first base coach to hand him his batting gloves without requesting "Time". The first base coach tells him the ball is live and to get on the bag. But B1 is now 10 feet from second and now the defense realizes what is happening. They throw to F6 who is at second base. B1 is safe at first on a throw that is dropped by F3.

Anything wrong with this? Is this different than the OP?

I'll take a shot on part two. It is different from the OP because the ball never was dead, and then put back in play. In the OP, the runner acquired 2nd base, the play was then dead, then the ball was put back in play, then the double steal attempt happened and Segura wound up on first. In your sitch, the ball is still live throughout. That is why I am confused, simply from lack of studying the rulebook. If the ball is live throughout, I know he can go back. But if a runner acquires second base, then the ball is dead and made back live, can he go back to first?

It's not about being dead - it's about the pitcher getting the ball on the rubber.

And as I said to Manny - I think that resets (or should) each play. IOW, the fire drill continues until play relaxes and the pitcher gets on the rubber. Then with the next play the drill can restart.

I've been wrong before.

Don't have my book with me, but isn't there a FED rule about a runner being out if he abandons his effort to advance?

Of course, the kicker to all this is that Segura was subsequently thrown out trying to
(re)steal second.

Theres an abandoment clause in all the rules sets.

In MLB, it's (generally) not going to be invoked until R2 gets into foul territory. I think this runner did make it to foul territory (but I haven't seen the play recently.)

For an R1 or R3, he'll have to be "well into" foul territory.

I can't imagine that the Comment after OBR 7.01 applies to each and every subsequent pitch.

By your understanding, B1 could hit a clean double, and then B2 and B3 strike out. R2 erroneously thinks there are three outs, so he starts jogging to his dugout on the first base side. He is informed more than halfway to first by his base coach that there are only two outs. I can't imagine that the rules would allow him to hightail it to first base to avoid the out.

7.01 says that once a runner achieves legal entitlement to a base, only two things can happen to him. He can either be put out or be forced to vacate the base by another runner who gains legal entitlement to that base. There is no option for him to return to a previous base.

7.02 says a runner can go to a previous base only if "forced to return". He is only forced to return if he is subject to an appeal for missing a base or failing to tag up properly, or if another runner is legally entitled to the base he tried to achieve. Arbitrarily returning to a previous base because of confusion or some other strange reason is not something I would categorize as being "forced to return."

Bad assumption. I said on each play (new fire drill), not on each pitch.

7.01 is subject to debate of course. Given there has been no "oops" yet from MLB I'd vote that it was called properly.

7.02 is definitely about being part of a play or its result (e.g. return to retouch while live, or on an award during a dead ball).

Segura baserunning :confused:
 

Hi,

Here is the clip:
http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?co...y_26416825&v=3

Questions:
1. Isn't that a balk from the pitcher? (he did not break and he threw to an unoccupied base?)
2. Two runners on one base the following runner is out when only when tagged however if the preceding runner stepped off the base thinking he was out and got tagged first would the following runner be able to safely claim second?
3. The runner going back to one was just crazy, right?

One large mess, coming right up...

1. F1 stepped towards 2nd, then disengaged. He was an infielder when he threw to 3rd.

2. Yes. The following runner is out when tagged only if the preceding runner is also on the base.

3. I don't know about crazy, but certainly ignorant of the rule.