NFHS Awarded base...then an appeal?
 

R1 on 3rd. Batter hits grounder to SS. SS throws to catcher who is 2-3 feet up the 3rd base line with a knee on the ground(blocking the plate).

R1 slides into the catcher before she has the ball. After catching the ball she tags R1 who hasn't made it to home,because of her obstruction. Both are now laying on the ground. No malicious contact.

PU calls time and awards the runner home on the obstruction call. R1, hearing she is safe, runs towards her dugout(she never touched the plate).

The peanut gallery shouts that she never touched home. Then... the defensive team coach asks the PU "Did she touch the plate?" Never said he was appealing her missing the plate.

As such this was not a proper appeal...or was it?:confused:

Questions:
Would R1 be called out or remain safe? If it had been a proper appeal.

Awarded bases must be legally touched. If he properly appeals, it's an out.

It is a proper appeal and OBS runner ruled out.

improper appeal
 

Since NFHS rule book refers to a "proper appeal"

What would be an example of an "improper appeal"?
Guessing?:confused:

Improper = not proper or according to the rules. By NFHS rules, the coach can make the dead ball appeal. She just has to do it, a) before the next legal or illegal pitch, b) at the end of a half-inning, before all the infielders have left fair territory and the catcher vacates her normal fielding position, or c) on the last play of the game, before the umpires leave the field of play.

Just like this guy did. Just come out and say what he thinks might have happened. Coach needs to actually say something about an appeal, please check with partner, etc.

I'm not sure I would accept the coach's question as a valid appeal.

It sounds as if he's not sure and he wants to know what I saw. If I tell him that the runner did not touch the plate, have I coached the coach?

I need to hear from him that he definitely thinks the runner did not touch the plate and he is appealing that. I can also allow for the fact that I would consider his voice inflection and body language in him asking the question to make it a valid appeal.

How about "You will have to appeal for me to be able to answer"?

OOO. If he didn't question it, he wouldn't ask. After all, an appeal is a request. The definition of request includes "asking" a question.

My first thought was like Andy's. He's asking if the runner missed, not saying the runner missed and asking for an appeal. My second thought was like Mike's... the book does not specify a magic word or phrase, only that it is clear what he is appealing. If you're unsure, nothing wrong with Cecil's suggestion, or even more directly, "Coach, are you making an appeal?"

In real life, I would accept what the coach said as an appeal. No need to play word games.

Indeed. You are just making the process take longer by asking him to rephrase it. If she had touched the plate, would you ask him to rephrase or would you simply say "Yes"?

It's obvious he wants an out. Rule on the appeal.

When a catcher wants you to check with your partner on a checked swing, isn't that an appeal? And doesn't she usually ask you, "Blue, did she go?" Or do you make her say, "Blue, I appeal that the batter offered at the pitch"?

Not often I disagree with you, Andy. I'm with the others; it is clear to me what he is asking. In any rule set where the coach can make that appeal (NCAA and NFHS), I am answering as a valid appeal. In ASA, I would most often ask the catcher to repeat what the coach asked.

If I don't have a missed base, I'm certainly answering to put it to bed. If I would answer on one side, I need to answer the opposite.

That is not an "appeal" in the sense of a missed base or plate.
But I agree with your concept.

We can debate semantics and what is in and not in the Rules Book, but this is not a "proper appeal". The DHC's question is telling me that he does not know if R1 did or did not touch HP, at least that is how we, as umpires, should be interpreting his question. And believe me, I have had HCs in both softball and baseball come out and ask me the wrong question because they did not have a clue as to what happened more times than I care to admit.

I think that the proper response (and some might think it is a little cheeky) to the DHC's question is: "Coach, are you telling me that you do not know if R1 did or did not touch HP?" Hopefully, the DHC will understand what he has been asked and either get help from one of his ACs or make the proper appeal.

Because I can guarantee everybody reading my post if you answer the DHC's question with a "no" followed by the DHC appealing R1's not touching HP, you will most likely be writing a game report regarding the OHC's ejection because he/she vigorously objected to you telling the DHC that R1 did not touch HP thus enabling the DHC to appeal the play at HP.

MTD, Sr.