Bunt and the Running Lane

[MD Longhorn]

(Moved to a new thread ... had nothing to do with the obstruction play in the W.S.)

[bob jenkins]

With the caveat that I didn't watch the video ....

Runners return to TOP in OBR (unless there was an intervening play) and to TOI in FED

[bluehair]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Runners return to TOP in OBR (unless there was an intervening play) and to TOI in FED

The intervening play in the OP was R3 scoring on the squeeze bunt before the RLI...score the run.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by bluehair

The intervening play in the OP was R3 scoring on the squeeze bunt before the RLI...score the run.

A runner crossing a base is not, by definition, "a play" in the context of this rule.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by bluehair

The intervening play in the OP was R3 scoring on the squeeze bunt before the RLI...score the run.

Not if the defense didn't play on R3 (again, I didn't watch the video, but the description in the OP seems to exclude any play on R3)

[bluehair]

The video was a play in last night's game. There was no RLI on that play.

The OP was speculating on whether it would be good strategy to throw at BR out of the RL if R3 is scoring on a suicide squeeze. I think I read the Interference comment wrong (mis-interpreted the word intervening).

So if R3 takes off, BR lays down the bunt, R3 crosses HP as fielder fields the bunt, then hits BR, who is out of the RL, with a throw to 1B , then R3 returns? In OBR yes, in Fed, no?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by bluehair

The video was a play in last night's game. There was no RLI on that play.

The OP was speculating on whether it would be good strategy to throw at BR out of the RL if R3 is scoring on a suicide squeeze. I think I read the Interference comment wrong (mis-interpreted the word intervening).

So if R3 takes off, BR lays down the bunt, R3 crosses HP as fielder fields the bunt, then hits BR, who is out of the RL, with a throw to 1B , then R3 returns? In OBR yes, in Fed, no?

Runners return to TOP in OBR (unless there was an intervening play) and to TOI in FED

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Runners return to TOP in OBR (unless there was an intervening play) and to TOI in FED

Just to be clear, you are referring to the OP, where the BR has not reached 1B and the intervening play (added to the OP sit) ruling in the MLBUM allows the run to score even though the OBR 2(a) comment would require a return at TOP as opposed to TOI.
I think it is important to understand that the MLBUM ruling is specific to a runner scoring and a running lane INT.
As it is , every double play has an intervening play but we return the runners TOP because of the 2(a) comment if we have a thrown ball INT.

[johnnyg08]

Originally Posted by bluehair

The intervening play in the OP was R3 scoring on the squeeze bunt before the RLI...score the run.

False. See definition of a play.

[bluehair]

Originally Posted by johnnyg08

False. See definition of a play.

I have an understanding what a play is. My misunderstanding was in the definition of intervening and was which play was the intervening one (if there is one). You have a pitch (a play, I believe) a bunt (a play, I believe), a runner scoring (without a play, I beleive), and an interferred with throw to 1B (a play). After re-reading the interference comment, I believe the exception to not returning R3 is if there is an intervening play is between the bunt play and the interference play not between the pitch play and the interference play.

I find it interesting that the OBR rule makers intended to punish the team who RLI by returning R3, even though the interference occurs after R3 scores while the Fed rule makers intended the opposite. This is a rules diff that I always have a hard time remembering.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by bluehair

I have an understanding what a play is. My misunderstanding was in the definition of intervening and was which play was the intervening one (if there is one). You have a pitch (a play, I believe) a bunt (a play, I believe), a runner scoring (without a play, I beleive), and an interferred with throw to 1B (a play). After re-reading the interference comment, I believe the exception to not returning R3 is if there is an intervening play is between the bunt play and the interference play not between the pitch play and the interference play.

I find it interesting that the OBR rule makers intended to punish the team who RLI by returning R3, even though the interference occurs after R3 scores while the Fed rule makers intended the opposite. This is a rules diff that I always have a hard time remembering.

A pitch is not a play. A bunt is not a play. You put a lie to your statement that you have an understanding of what a play is. There's a definition.

The easy (but not perfect) way to remember is generally, a play is an attempt to get someone out. You're making it harder than it needs to be by wondering if all these other things are plays and concerning yourself with what came between what.

The correct answer has been posted here a few times. The "intervening play" would come about if the fielder (for example) threw home first and then the catcher tried to get the out at first... THAT would be an intervening play, changing the ruling.

[bluehair]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

You put a lie to your statement...

First, I may be mistaken, but if you're calling me a lier, {deleted}.

Second, I had no idea what intervening meant in a baseball context, so I looked it up in my Funk & Wagnall. F&W didn't have a baseball context definition either, so I had to piece it together. Intervening means coming in between other things. So it made sense to me that the baseball context is that the intervening play comes in between other things...plays, pitches, whatever.

Third, I concurred that the answer to the OP question was that R3 returned. I agreed that R3 scoring wasn't an "intervening play". So WTF is your beef ?

Fourth, If you say that a play is an attempt to get someone out, how is a pitch not an attempt to get someone out and a not play. I know there is a "pitch or play" reference in the RB. Is that the only cite? And why does the squeeze play definition use the word play?

[Rita C]

Originally Posted by bluehair

The intervening play in the OP was R3 scoring on the squeeze bunt before the RLI...score the run.

IF there was a tag attempt or the like, that would be an intervening play. Otherwise the runner returns. Just crossing the plate is not an intervening play.

Rita

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by Rita C

IF there was a tag attempt or the like, that would be an intervening play. Otherwise the runner returns. Just crossing the plate is not an intervening play.

Rita

There is always a tag attempt or the like on any double play. I believe the intervening play ruling only applies to the running lane interference example.

[EsqUmp]

OBR Rule 2: Interference - Comment A refers to a squeeze play, wherein R3 attempts to score, the defense makes a play on R3, R3 is safe and then the defense attempts to retire the BR at 1st base and THEN you have 3 foot lane interference.

Had the initial throw gone to 1st base to retire BR and R3 had crossed home plate at the time of the interference, R3 would be returned to 3rd base.

With the exception explained in comment A, MLB does not allow runners to advance when the BR is called out for interference. Some may recall A-Rod slapping the ball out of Arroyo's glove in game 6 of the ALCS between the Yankees and Redsox in 2004. All six umpires got together to change the call (2013 wasn't the first time this happened, despite the idiot commentators' statements). Jeter had already rounded 2nd base at the time of the interference. He ultimately scored when the ball ended up in the outfield and A-Rod made it to 2nd base. A-Rod was declared out and Jeter was returned to 1st base.

Randy Marsh had good positioning on the play to see a swipe tag. Unfortunately, another Red Sox cut between him and Arroyo and Marsh lost sight of the ball. I was surprised that Torre argued as long as he did. Torre, just like Girardi, was terrible at picking arguments and knowing when to end them.