Abandonment (BRD example play)

[David Emerling]

I had the need to look up something regarding abandonment and got out the BRD (2014 edition).

Play 263-451 on p.270.

It's an OBR example and says the following:

R1, R3, 1 out, 2-2, top of ninth. B1 hits weakly to the second baseman, who swipes at R1, then throws to first in time for what he thinks is an inning-ending double play. R3, running on contact, touches the plate before the "tag" of R1. The umpire calls R1 safe, but the runner, thinking he is out, heads for his position in center field. Now the umpire calls out R1. Ruling: R1 is out for abandonment. That out should be signaled by the umpire, who will also score the run. But if the defense appeals, the out at second becomes a force out, and the run will not count.

I assume the appeal is that R1 "missed" 2nd base. But, that would not be a force play because the batter-runner was put out at 1st. That removes the force. Now it's a timing play. The run should count.

Am I missing something?

[Matt]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

I had the need to look up something regarding abandonment and got out the BRD (2014 edition).

Play 263-451 on p.270.

It's an OBR example and says the following:

R1, R3, 1 out, 2-2, top of ninth. B1 hits weakly to the second baseman, who swipes at R1, then throws to first in time for what he thinks is an inning-ending double play. R3, running on contact, touches the plate before the "tag" of R1. The umpire calls R1 safe, but the runner, thinking he is out, heads for his position in center field. Now the umpire calls out R1. Ruling: R1 is out for abandonment. That out should be signaled by the umpire, who will also score the run. But if the defense appeals, the out at second becomes a force out, and the run will not count.

I assume the appeal is that R1 "missed" 2nd base. But, that would not be a force play because the batter-runner was put out at 1st. That removes the force. Now it's a timing play. The run should count.

Am I missing something?

I have argued ad nauseam elsewhere that this appeal is not a valid appeal. There was no appealable infraction; you can't miss a base you never reached.

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by Matt

I have argued ad nauseam elsewhere that this appeal is not a valid appeal. There was no appealable infraction; you can't miss a base you never reached.

I hadn't thought of that angle. That would be another reason that the run should score.

But, would you agree that, even if you could appeal, it certainly wouldn't be a force play as stated in the BRD example play? At the time of the appeal, the batter-runner had already been retired prior to reaching 1st.

[Rich Ives]

Merkle.

[bob jenkins]

It might all get back to when a force is removed for a runner who misses a base -- as I recall there was some discussion to the effect that (in some codes), a runner who was forced at the start of the play was still "forced" if he was declared out for missing a base.

Others have had success in writing Carl and asking about other points.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

It might all get back to when a force is removed for a runner who misses a base -- as I recall there was some discussion to the effect that (in some codes), a runner who was forced at the start of the play was still "forced" if he was declared out for missing a base.

There used to be. I think now all agree that the status of the runner at the time of the infraction is the governing factor. (Is there any way to make that sentence clearer?)

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

But, would you agree that, even if you could appeal, it certainly wouldn't be a force play as stated in the BRD example play? At the time of the appeal, the batter-runner had already been retired prior to reaching 1st.

Makes sense to me. In fact, an argument could be made that R1 had every right to return to first base after the BR was put out. So an appeal that he should have advanced and touched second is bogus, in my mind.

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by Manny A

Makes sense to me. In fact, an argument could be made that R1 had every right to return to first base after the BR was put out. So an appeal that he should have advanced and touched second is bogus, in my mind.

Well, I think the abandonment call is still correct if R1 goes wandering off as described. In the umpire's judgment, if he is no longer intent on running the bases and is proceeding toward his dugout or defensive position, thinking he is either out or the inning is over - it's abandonment.

R1's abandonment occurs after R3 scores. Therefore, the run scores.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

Well, I think the abandonment call is still correct if R1 goes wandering off as described. In the umpire's judgment, if he is no longer intent on running the bases and is proceeding toward his dugout or defensive position, thinking he is either out or the inning is over - it's abandonment.

R1's abandonment occurs after R3 scores. Therefore, the run scores.

I'm not debating the abandonment call. What I'm pointing out is that an appeal for R1 failing to touch second is bogus because he was not required to advance to second after the BR was put out. Before he was appropriately ruled out for abandonment, he had every right to return to first base. So how can there be an appeal at second for a force out??