|
Mon Aug 11, 2003, 04:27pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Are you certain that Bordick could not retouch the bases after the ball became dead? If that is the case, that rule is unfair. The fact he was past 2nd when the ball became dead does not seem like a good reason to penalize him. The fact a player does not know he has to retouch the bases would be a good reason to penalize him.
|
|
Mon Aug 11, 2003, 04:36pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
I did not see the play in its entirety. I saw only a part of it. I am going by reports here.
If the ball became dead before Bordick touched second, then he cannot legally correct his infraction. If the ball became dead after Bordick touched second, then he can legally correct his infraction during the dead ball. Those are the rules, and they're aren't always fair.
__________________
Jim Porter
|
|
Mon Aug 11, 2003, 04:48pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
He was prohibited from returning because, after the ball became dead, he advanced to the next base.
As for the appeal at an intervening base, I understand the logic, but I don't think the rules would allow it. I don't think that because the runner had to touch 2B and did not, he can be appealed at 2B. The appeal is at 1B only. Let's take a couple of extreme examples. 1. Suppose Abel hits an inside-the-park home run but misses 1B. Let's add that the throw home skips into DBT. To get an out, the defense must appeal at 1B. They cannot appeal at 2B or 3B or even home under the theory that Abel, to correct his mistake, would have to retouch home, 3B, 2B, in order to retouch at 1B. 2. Abel on 2B. Baker hits a 420-foot fly to center. Abel leaves too soon, tags 3B, sprints home, and goes into the dugout. The defense must appeal at 2B. They cannot appeal at 3B or home under the theory that Abel would have to retouch home and 3B in order to return and correct his mistake. I will search J&R, BRD, etc., tonight to see whether I can find a definite answer. I am not 100% sure of my position, but if I'm wrong, I really learned something. As I remember, the book says, ". . . and he or the base is tagged." It does not add, "or any intervening bases the runner would have to touch to effect a proper return." I just read Bluezebra's post. That makes sense. If the runner not only left 1B but also missed 2B, then the defense can appeal at either base. [Edited by greymule on Aug 11th, 2003 at 04:51 PM]
__________________
greymule More whiskey—and fresh horses for my men! Roll Tide!
|
|
Mon Aug 11, 2003, 05:31pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
I saw the play live and the 5 or 6 replays that they showed.
As far as I could tell, Bordick was probably just short of 2nd base when the ball went out of play. But he was just past 2nd when he realized that he was being awarded 3rd base. As far as the ESPN highlights, he didn't take a shortcut to third base
|
|
Mon Aug 11, 2003, 05:41pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
Jim Porter
|
|
Mon Aug 11, 2003, 05:47pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Greymule, I don't know the answer. It just seems plausible that under a failure to retouch scenario, all bases that the runner is required to touch in order to correct his infraction are fair game for appeal. For example, in your second scenario, why would they only have to appeal at 2nd? Why wouldn't an appeal at third or home be viable? The runner failed to touch those bases when he was required to retreat. It's not the same as a missed base. It's a requirement to retouch. Seems plausible, doesn't it? Heck, the defense only needs to tag the runner himself, standing on any base. Why couldn't they just tag any base that the runner was required to touch? I don't know the answer, but it sure makes for an interesting question to ponder.
__________________
Jim Porter
|
|
Mon Aug 11, 2003, 08:04pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
The answer is simple, Jim. They blew the appeal call (by rule), but the achieved the correct result that is expected (by rule) since the runner never retouched.
This is BS about declaring the runner out when the appeal is made at the wrong base. It has nothing to do about appealing a base he'd be required to touch during a needed return which he never makes. A runner is not "required" to correct a baserunning error. However, if he elects not to return to correct his error, he is at liability of being declared out if the defense properly appeals. That did not occur here. The runner never attempted return---thus he never missed a base---and the defense never properly appealed. This thread reminds me of the old fairy tale of the Emperor's New Clothes. It seems nobody here wants to admit that the officials simply blew the call based on the happenings of the play. Open your eyes; see that the Emperor is naked; see that the officials simply blew this call. Of course, the next question for Peter is whether you think they purposely blew the rule to achieve the correct result and to keep them out of allowing this Third World play to progress into becoming The Twilight Zone? I realize, of course, that your answer is just speculation.... Freix
|
|
Mon Aug 11, 2003, 10:03pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
NAPBL Umpire Manual Ruling 3.12, page 27 DEFENSE MUST APPEAL ORIGINAL BASE AFTER CATCH
When a runner misses a base and a fielder holds the ball on the missed base, or on the base originally occupied by the runner if a fly ball is caught, and appeals for the umpires decision, the runner is out when the umpire sustains the appeal. Play: Runner on first, batter hits the ball far into the outfield and runner races for third. Catch is made, and outfielder throws ball to shortstop who steps on second base asking umpire to rule an out. Ruling: This is improper play by the shortstop, as runner may be called out only by being tagged or first base being touched before the runner reaches first base. This is the Minor League interpretation, but I have a hard time believing it would be different in MLB.
__________________
www.geocities.com/upump
|
|
Mon Aug 11, 2003, 10:23pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Then either they blew the ruling bigtime, or Bob is right and he took a shortcut to third. Shame on me for thinking this wouldn't be covered somewhere.
__________________
Jim Porter
|
|
Mon Aug 11, 2003, 10:49pm
|
||||
|
||||
|
I'll add the citation from Evans Annotated that covers this:
----------- Runners must retouch after all fly balls are caught. This includes both fair and foul balls. The runner must retouch his original base. this is the base he occupied at the time the pitcher initiated his delivery. A runner who is running on the pitch and has actually touched a succeeding base at the time the ball is hit, must return and touch the previously occupied base (his original base at the time of the pitch). The defensive team must make their appeal for failure to retouch at that original base. Even though the defense may be able to physically make an appeal at another base touched by the runner before he retouches it, this is not a valid appeal. ------------- Rich
|
|
Tue Aug 12, 2003, 11:35am
|
|||
|
|||
|
I posed this situation to the WUA. Their answer:
"Hi Garth, The umpire was mistaken. The appeal should have been made at first or by tagging the runner on third. Jim Reynolds World Umpires Association
__________________
GB
|
|
Thu Aug 21, 2003, 08:32am
|
|||
|
|||
|
I had also e-mail the WUA and got the same reply. I had also asked if Bordick had the right to return and tag up at first base after the ball was dead. They said yes until the time he touched third base, which was the base he was being awarded.
Another variation to this question. Batter hits a triple a fails to touch both first base and second base. Can the defense appeal to first or second? I would think in this situation either base is appealable. Jay
|
|
Thu Aug 21, 2003, 09:43am
|
||||
|
||||
|
Yes, but the result may be different depending on whether a runner scored on the play.
If the appeal is on the BR at first base, no runs can score. If the appeal is at second base, it becomes a time play and all runs that score prior to the appeal count. Rich
|
|
Thu Aug 21, 2003, 10:48am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Reminds me of a play in the 1962 season, I believe. Marvelous Marv Throneberry of the Mets hit a triple, and was called out on appeal for not touching 1st base. Manager Casey Stengel came out to umpire, and the ump said, "Casey, don't bother, he didn't touch 2nd base either." Stengel responded, "Well, I sure as hell know he touched 3rd, he's standing on it!"
I would imagine we'll get a few more of these stories revisited while the Tigers make their run at history.
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
