Runner fails to touch 2nd base.....Lansing loses in extra innings!!!

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by johnnyg08

So is this abandonment or an appeal?

It could have been both. Or neither.

But, based on the video, they did get it right.

And, I think BU is at the plate to talk to the manager and to make sure that PU knew that the game wasn't over.

Or, maybe BU was running off and PU stopped him.

[Texas Aggie]

What in the world could the manager be arguing?

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by texas aggie

what in the world could the manager be arguing?

for mercy

[umpjim]

From the MLBUM and PBUC:

"Bases loaded, two out, score tied in the bottom of the ninth inning. Batter hits a home run out of the ballpark. Runner on first, thinking the home run wins the game, leaves the baseline and heads toward the dugout. The runner at first is declared out before the runner from third reaches home plate. Other runners continue around the bases and eventually touch home.
Ruling: No runs score; the third out was made before the runner from third touched homeplate. Game continues in the top of the tenth inning with the score still tied."

So end result the same in the OP, but, if you call abandonment on R1 and PU has R3 scoring before the out call the run should score. Except, can you still accept an appeal at 2B for a force out?
Wendelstedt does not like the PBUC and MLBUM interps.

[bob jenkins]

Yes, you can get an appeal for the force out.

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Yes, you can get an appeal for the force out.

On the premise that this third world stuff wouldn't happen to me (except in the LL games I umpire) I have been negligent in informing myself about the rules.
Now it has happened in a MiLB game and we don't know exactly how they ruled except the end result was proper. But if the BU ruled abandonment, as PBUC and MLBUM says they should, and the PU ruled "run scored" (not what happened in the OP) do we have game over and reset for a proper appeal or is the throw to 2B during "continuing action" a good appeal?

I think abandonment in this particular situation might be grabbing the shitty end of the stick if the defense does what they did in the OP.

[CT1]

Hard to imagine that R3 wouldn't touch home before a shocked U1 or U2 declared R1 out.

Especially if it prevents extra innings.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by umpjim

From the MLBUM and PBUC:

"Bases loaded, two out, score tied in the bottom of the ninth inning. Batter hits a home run out of the ballpark. Runner on first, thinking the home run wins the game, leaves the baseline and heads toward the dugout. The runner at first is declared out before the runner from third reaches home plate. Other runners continue around the bases and eventually touch home.
Ruling: No runs score; the third out was made before the runner from third touched homeplate. Game continues in the top of the tenth inning with the score still tied."

So end result the same in the OP, but, if you call abandonment on R1 and PU has R3 scoring before the out call the run should score. Except, can you still accept an appeal at 2B for a force out?
Wendelstedt does not like the PBUC and MLBUM interps.

I have to question the wording of the ruling here. Why would they allude that this is a timing play? This, to me, is clearly an example of a forced runner being declared out before he reaches his forced-to base. It shouldn't matter if the out was made by virtue of an actual play, an appeal, or an abandonment call. He was forced to second base, he never achieved second base, and he was declared out. How is this not a force play but instead a timing play?

[UES]

Originally Posted by Manny A

I have to question the wording of the ruling here. Why would they allude that this is a timing play? This, to me, is clearly an example of a forced runner being declared out before he reaches his forced-to base. It shouldn't matter if the out was made by virtue of an actual play, an appeal, or an abandonment call. He was forced to second base, he never achieved second base, and he was declared out. How is this not a force play but instead a timing play?

I'm with Manny on this... and a big believer in the K.I.S.S. principle!

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by Manny A

I have to question the wording of the ruling here. Why would they allude that this is a timing play? This, to me, is clearly an example of a forced runner being declared out before he reaches his forced-to base. It shouldn't matter if the out was made by virtue of an actual play, an appeal, or an abandonment call. He was forced to second base, he never achieved second base, and he was declared out. How is this not a force play but instead a timing play?

To properly appeal the force play, the ball must be made live again. I don't many umpires that are going to put a ball back into play after a walk-off situation. Therefore, you have to declare the runner has abandoned the base to get an out here.

-Josh

[UES]

Originally Posted by jdmara

To properly appeal the force play, the ball must be made live again. I don't many umpires that are going to put a ball back into play after a walk-off situation. Therefore, you have to declare the runner has abandoned the base to get an out here.

-Josh

Not sure the ball was ever declared "dead" - the RF in the video is pointing over towards 2B where the SS is standing on the base with the ball looking for an umpire to make a call???

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by jdmara

To properly appeal the force play, the ball must be made live again. I don't many umpires that are going to put a ball back into play after a walk-off situation. Therefore, you have to declare the runner has abandoned the base to get an out here.

-Josh

if the team wants to make an appeal, you do. And, if there's some rule requirement that there be a batter, you ignore that part of it.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by jdmara

To properly appeal the force play, the ball must be made live again. I don't many umpires that are going to put a ball back into play after a walk-off situation. Therefore, you have to declare the runner has abandoned the base to get an out here.

Sorry, but you're not addressing my concern. This has nothing to do with an appeal.

The MLBUM play that umpjim quoted has R1 failing to go to second base on an apparent walk-off grand slam with two outs. R1 is declared out for abandonment for the third out. The ruling on the play said that since the abandonment declaration happened before R3 touched home, R3's run doesn't count.

Seems to me it shouldn't matter if the abandonment declaration happens before or after R3 touches home. The result of the call is what amounts to a force out, so when R3 touches is immaterial. Or so I thought. The MLBUM ruling makes it sound like this is a timing play.

[Tim C]

It is just "Manny being Manny"

T