Bush League but it almost happened last night

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Manny A

The interps given for runners switching bases includes ruling those runners out, 5.02 notwithstanding. Others here have quoted those interps here.

That same interp is provided in FED Softball, as I mentioned before. And it doesn't include bogus references to one runner passing the other and the other runner going in reverse.

One problem. There is no current interpretation in baseball that covers this, at least that I can find.

[johnnyg08]

I'm a little late to the party, but I think I agree w/ Matt. I don't think you can get an out here. You can EJ, but I don't think you can get an out.

[bob jenkins]

2003 FED Interps, Situation 3: During a time-out, with runners on first and second base, R2 switches places with R1 because he is faster and plans on stealing third base when the game resumes. RULING: When detected, the umpire will award two outs to the defense, warn the coach and eject R2 and R1. One out is assessed for passing a runner and another out is for running the bases in reverse order. This infraction may be corrected during a dead ball when detected by the umpire, defensive team or offensive team. (3-3-1g, 8-4-2m, n)

(Any typos are likely mine. The R1, R2 notation is FED's)

[Matt]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

2003 FED Interps, Situation 3: During a time-out, with runners on first and second base, R2 switches places with R1 because he is faster and plans on stealing third base when the game resumes. RULING: When detected, the umpire will award two outs to the defense, warn the coach and eject R2 and R1. One out is assessed for passing a runner and another out is for running the bases in reverse order. This infraction may be corrected during a dead ball when detected by the umpire, defensive team or offensive team. (3-3-1g, 8-4-2m, n)

(Any typos are likely mine. The R1, R2 notation is FED's)

Like I said, no current interpretations.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Matt

Like I said, no current interpretations.

So you have a reference that the interp is no longer valid?

[Matt]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

So you have a reference that the interp is no longer valid?

Yes, common sense. Wait, we're using FED...

In all seriousness, there's probably a reason that this is a) not in the casebook, and b) not located anywhere. My hunch is that they realized how it doesn't have a basis by rule. I can't enforce something that only has an existing basis on stevetheump's website.

I'll be quite straightforward--I'm not enforcing outs here, FED or not. If this ever were to happen, I'd tell the DC to protest my not giving any outs, and see what comes of it.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by Matt

I'll be quite straightforward--I'm not enforcing outs here, FED or not. If this ever were to happen, I'd tell the DC to protest my not giving any outs, and see what comes of it.

Just out of curiosity, what WOULD you do?

Suppose after the base switch, the pitcher delivers the pitch, the batter singles to knock home the lead runner from second, and the trail runner moves to second. The DC comes out and protests that the runner at second was originally the lead runner, and you verify that fact by checking your lineup card. Would you allow the run? Would you require a do-over?

Originally Posted by Matt

In all seriousness, there's probably a reason that this is a) not in the casebook, and b) not located anywhere.

I realize we're talking baseball here. But as I posted before, the interp is located somewhere. It's a FED Softball case play.

Also, ASA Softball has this in its rule book under the "Runner is Out" section, 8-7:

Y. When base runners switch positions on the bases they occupied following any conference.
EFFECT: Each runner on an improper base shall be declared out. In addition, the manager shall be ejected for unsportsmanlike conduct.

And in the NCAA Softball rule book, you'll find this under section 12.5, the "Base Runner is Out after a Proper Appeal" section:

12.5.3 When, after a conference, base runners switch positions on the bases they occupied, the ball has been put back in play, and before the end of the half-inning.
EFFECT—Each base runner on the improper base shall be declared out and ejected. In addition, the head coach shall be ejected for unsportsmanlike behavior. (Behavioral ejections.)

I find it interesting that NCAA Softball requires an appeal for this. I'm willing to bet there's similar language in other softball rule books (PONY, USSSA, etc.)

Why it's all over the place in softball, but not in baseball is beyond me. In my experience, baseball has more incidents of this kind of unsporting crap than the girls' game.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Matt

In all seriousness, there's probably a reason that this is a) not in the casebook,

So we're to the "if an interp doesn't make it to the case book is it valid?" question. One that's been around for a long time, and never answered (afaik) by FED.

(This question comes up from time to time, and in other sports.)

[LRZ]

Originally Posted by Matt

Yes, common sense. Wait, we're using FED...

This is just about as true a statement I've ever read, and (along with the organizational politics) it explains why I no longer work FED baseball or soccer.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

2003 FED Interps, Situation 3: During a time-out, with runners on first and second base, R2 switches places with R1 because he is faster and plans on stealing third base when the game resumes. RULING: When detected, the umpire will award two outs to the defense, warn the coach and eject R2 and R1. One out is assessed for passing a runner and another out is for running the bases in reverse order. This infraction may be corrected during a dead ball when detected by the umpire, defensive team or offensive team. (3-3-1g, 8-4-2m, n)

(Any typos are likely mine. The R1, R2 notation is FED's)

This interp gives you the right to call 2 outs if the runners switch places.

Problem is, it says one is out for running the bases backward, and the other is out for passing.

And NEITHER of these happen in the OP. I believe the reasoning they give for 2 outs is faulty, but since this is the most recent interpretation that is even close to the OP, and the 2 outs they give us refer to things that don't happen in the OP, I cannot justify 2 outs here, even though I think that's what FED wants here.

[CT1]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I cannot justify 2 outs here, even though I think that's what FED wants here.

I'm trying to visualize what I might write in a report to our state office. I can certainly justify EJs for Unsportsmanlike Conduct [3-3-1g(4)], but I don't see how I can justify outs.