![]() |
|
|||
It is true (all codes). The D can still play on the B/R before he reaches 1st base, even after the third out.
|
|
|||
Quote:
My 2012 Wendelstedt Umpire manual reverses that interp and does not allow the BR to be put out if the defense played on somebody else for the third out. They say the defense had the opportunity to make the third at 1B out and was not vigilant. Does MD Longhorn have other cites for this? |
|
|||
But the BR, having not yet reached first, is not required to continue running after the 3rd out is made elsewhere.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'” West Houston Mike |
|
|||
Quote:
Carl says he hopes this never happens in any of our (and his) games. I share his wish. |
|
|||
And J/R agrees with the three official rulings: the advantageous 4th out applies to any force out or the B/R.
If you think this ruling doesn't make sense, ask yourself if Wendelstedt's alternate ruling (4th out is only effective if an appeal is upheld) makes sense. Bases loaded, ball to F6 who tags R2 after R3 scores. According to the Wendelstedt interp, if the B/R deserts, or R1 abandons before reaching 2nd, the run scores, and there is no advantageous 4th out. But if the B/R or R1 continues to advance, and misses the base, now a 4th out can supersede R2's out. IMO, this is the interp that doesn't make sense. Why is abandoning /deserting OK, but missing a base is not? Neither act is legal base running. Instead, if we believe (as has been officially ruled) that a 4th out is effective whenever a forced runner or the B/R is put out before reaching their advance base or if a missed base appeal on such a runner is upheld, then the rule is self consistent. |
|
|||
I've never bought into that theory that runners should continue running after a third out is recorded. After all, OBR 5.07 is pretty clear, in my mind, of what happens:
"When three offensive players are legally put out, that team takes the field and the opposing team becomes the offensive team." There is no requirement whatsoever specified in the rule that says other runners are required to continue running after "three offensive players are legally put out" to meet whatever obligation they had before that third out. It says that they simply take the field at that point, because all obligations to advance are done, finished, completed. Obligations to continue advancing to bases after play essentially concludes are limited to when winning runs score. There is nothing in the rules requiring the same after three outs are recorded. So I have no idea why authoritative interpreters out there require runners to keep running after three outs when the rule clearly tells those runner they must now go play defense.
__________________
"Let's face it. Umpiring is not an easy or happy way to make a living. In the abuse they suffer, and the pay they get for it, you see an imbalance that can only be explained by their need to stay close to a game they can't resist." -- Bob Uecker |
|
|||
Um ... you're aware that no run scores on this play either, right? No need for an advantageous 4th out - the THIRD out was a force already.
That aside, insisting that runners run after the 3rd out does not make sense (and never has). The inning is over after 3 outs. 4th out appeals apply to transgressions that occurred before that third out.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'” West Houston Mike |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Rich Ives Different does not equate to wrong |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
"I don't think I'm very happy. I always fall asleep to the sound of my own screams...and then I always get woken up to the sound of my own screams. Do you think I'm unhappy?" |
|
|||
Agree. But those fourth out appeals are on running violations before the third out is recorded. There shouldn't be any requirements for runners to continue running after the third out, per the wording of 5.07.
__________________
"Let's face it. Umpiring is not an easy or happy way to make a living. In the abuse they suffer, and the pay they get for it, you see an imbalance that can only be explained by their need to stay close to a game they can't resist." -- Bob Uecker |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Wendelstedt says that the onus is on the defense to get the proper third out.
|
|
|||
If you go with the interpretation that fourth outs can be made on non-appeal plays, then that puts the onus on the offense to keep playing.
__________________
"I don't think I'm very happy. I always fall asleep to the sound of my own screams...and then I always get woken up to the sound of my own screams. Do you think I'm unhappy?" |
|
|||
I will agree it is on both to keep playing. The situation in the OP would require the BR to accquire 1B before the defense can tag the BR or 1B for the run to count.
|
|
|||
This exactly.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'” West Houston Mike |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Tag Ups - Time Play not a Force Out | Canary | Softball | 17 | Thu May 06, 2010 02:28pm |
Force play or time play? | Rita C | Baseball | 44 | Sat Dec 05, 2009 10:12am |
Time play | umpjim | Baseball | 8 | Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:46am |
TIME OUT or PLAY ON? | tcannizzo | Softball | 17 | Wed Mar 21, 2007 03:28pm |
Force or Time Play?? | Dave Davies | Baseball | 7 | Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:14pm |