Base Abandonment on the Final Play

[SMEngmann]

I am a baseball coach who also officiates basketball. I witnessed the following play in a baseball playoff game and would like some expert analysis:

Tie game bases loaded 1 out in the 7th Inning (NFHS). BR attempts squeeze, gets bunt down and touches 1st base. R3 touches plate, but R2 and R3 fail to touch 2nd and 3rd respectively and join in a celebration on the IF. If there is no appeal by the defensive team, can R2 and R3 be declared out for abandonment, and if so, would the run score?

[TwoBits]

Originally Posted by SMEngmann

I am a baseball coach who also officiates basketball. I witnessed the following play in a baseball playoff game and would like some expert analysis:

Tie game bases loaded 1 out in the 7th Inning (NFHS). BR attempts squeeze, gets bunt down and touches 1st base. R3 touches plate, but R2 and R3 fail to touch 2nd and 3rd respectively and join in a celebration on the IF. If there is no appeal by the defensive team, can R2 and R3 be declared out for abandonment, and if so, would the run score?

As described in OP, this is not abandonment.

8-4-1p Note: Any runner, after reaching first base, who leaves the baseline heading for the dugout or his defensive position believing that there is no further play, shall be declared out if the umpire judges the act of the runner to be considered abandoning his effort to run the bases.

Since the runners were neither heading for the dugout nor a defensive position, they should not be called out for abandonment.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by TwoBits

As described in OP, this is not abandonment.

8-4-1p Note: Any runner, after reaching first base, who leaves the baseline heading for the dugout or his defensive position believing that there is no further play, shall be declared out if the umpire judges the act of the runner to be considered abandoning his effort to run the bases.

Since the runners were neither heading for the dugout nor a defensive position, they should not be called out for abandonment.

Huh? The runners essentially gave up their running responsibilities by joining in on a game-ending celebration. How is that not considered "abandoning his effort to run the bases"? One could argue they were on their way to the dugout, but stopped along the way to celebrate. They certainly weren't postponing their effort to run the bases.

Also, there is verbiage in the NFHS case book that supports abandonment calls without the need for the runner to go all the way to the dugout or defensive position:
- Under case play 8.4.2 Situation C, there's a sentence that reads, "Upon reaching base a runner abandons his effort when he leaves the baseline."
- Case play 8.4.2 Situation V involves a runner who thought he was out when he really wasn't, and the ruling says, "When R2 began leaving the field, he should be considered as having abandoned his effort to return or advance, and shall be declared out."

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Manny A

Huh? The runners essentially gave up their running responsibilities by joining in on a game-ending celebration. How is that not considered "abandoning his effort to run the bases"? One could argue they were on their way to the dugout, but stopped along the way to celebrate. They certainly weren't postponing their effort to run the bases.

Also, there is verbiage in the NFHS case book that supports abandonment calls without the need for the runner to go all the way to the dugout or defensive position:
- Under case play 8.4.2 Situation C, there's a sentence that reads, "Upon reaching base a runner abandons his effort when he leaves the baseline."
- Case play 8.4.2 Situation V involves a runner who thought he was out when he really wasn't, and the ruling says, "When R2 began leaving the field, he should be considered as having abandoned his effort to return or advance, and shall be declared out."

That case play applies after they reach whatever base they are heading to, and then leave (and wouldn't be a force out even if we bothered to call it as such.)

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

That case play applies after they reach whatever base they are heading to, and then leave (and wouldn't be a force out even if we bothered to call it as such.)

So, R1 on second heads for third on a 4-3 ground out. He assumes there are three outs, so he heads towards his dugout at first, and he's between the plate and mound.

Conversely, R1 on second stays put as the batter strikes out. He assumes there are three outs, so he heads towards his dugout at first, and he's between first base and the mound.

Aren't both of these considered abandonment?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Manny A

So, R1 on second heads for third on a 4-3 ground out. He assumes there are three outs, so he heads towards his dugout at first, and he's between the plate and mound.

Conversely, R1 on second stays put as the batter strikes out. He assumes there are three outs, so he heads towards his dugout at first, and he's between first base and the mound.

Aren't both of these considered abandonment?

Sure. But neither have anything to do with the case play you posted.

[bob jenkins]

Abandonment is not a force out so the run scores but the defense could appeal to get the force outs and continue the game

[BEAREF]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Abandonment is not a force out so the run scores but the defense could appeal to get the force outs and continue the game

Which is it?

[TwoBits]

Originally Posted by BEAREF

Which is it?

I think Bob is saying that, even if an umpire judges abandonment, the run still scores. However, if the defense appeals the play, the appeals in this case are force outs, and the run would not score.

[bsaucer]

Originally Posted by TwoBits

I think Bob is saying that, even if an umpire judges abandonment, the run still scores. However, if the defense appeals the play, the appeals in this case are force outs, and the run would not score.

Would this be a live ball appeal, or dead ball appeal?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by bsaucer

Would this be a live ball appeal, or dead ball appeal?

Well, if it's FED, I think it could be either. But, I don't really remember the OP and I didn't go back and look.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BEAREF

Which is it?

Yes.

[jTheUmp]

And, in this case, the order of the appeals would make a big difference, wouldn't it?

R1 and R2 both miss 2nd and 3rd base, respectively.

If you first appeal R2 missing 3rd, then R1 missing 2nd, you'll get force outs for both, meaning the inning ends, no run scores, and we go to the 8th inning.

If you first appeal R1 missing 2nd, then R2 missing 3rd, you'll get R1 out on a force, but then you'll have removed the force from R2, which means that even though R2 will still be called out for missing 3rd, the run will still score and the game will be over.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

And, in this case, the order of the appeals would make a big difference, wouldn't it?

R1 and R2 both miss 2nd and 3rd base, respectively.

If you first appeal R2 missing 3rd, then R1 missing 2nd, you'll get force outs for both, meaning the inning ends, no run scores, and we go to the 8th inning.

If you first appeal R1 missing 2nd, then R2 missing 3rd, you'll get R1 out on a force, but then you'll have removed the force from R2, which means that even though R2 will still be called out for missing 3rd, the run will still score and the game will be over.

Correct.

[nopachunts]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

And, in this case, the order of the appeals would make a big difference, wouldn't it?

R1 and R2 both miss 2nd and 3rd base, respectively.

If you first appeal R2 missing 3rd, then R1 missing 2nd, you'll get force outs for both, meaning the inning ends, no run scores, and we go to the 8th inning.

If you first appeal R1 missing 2nd, then R2 missing 3rd, you'll get R1 out on a force, but then you'll have removed the force from R2, which means that even though R2 will still be called out for missing 3rd, the run will still score and the game will be over.

And let the s***storm begin when the you tell the coach that the run still counts because he appealed in the wrong order.