"Last Time By" in Softball

[AtlUmpSteve]

IMO, the "last time by" concept contradicts the requirement to touch bases in the proper order. If one must touch first, second, third, then return order must third, second, first. If one must retreat to first and misses second, the only way to remedy would be to go back to touch second, AND THEN go back to first again; only after retouching ALL in the proper order could one again advance to second and be safe there.

At least, that's how I learned it; and the case plays in all these posts above seem to lean in that direction.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

IMO, the "last time by" concept contradicts the requirement to touch bases in the proper order. If one must touch first, second, third, then return order must third, second, first. If one must retreat to first and misses second, the only way to remedy would be to go back to touch second, AND THEN go back to first again; only after retouching ALL in the proper order could one again advance to second and be safe there.

At least, that's how I learned it; and the case plays in all these posts above seem to lean in that direction.

I was about to post a similar statement. Last time by gives the runner an advantage since it allows the runner to take a shortcut to retouch first (in the OP example).

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by Dakota

I was about to post a similar statement. Last time by gives the runner an advantage since it allows the runner to take a shortcut to retouch first (in the OP example).

In NFHS and NCAA baseball a gross/intentional miss would not be covered by last time by and would be appealable. I think MLB/OBR currently does not apply "gross miss" and any "last time by" touch would be allowed.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by Dakota

I was about to post a similar statement. Last time by gives the runner an advantage since it allows the runner to take a shortcut to retouch first (in the OP example).

Perhaps, but that assumes the runner would take that shortcut, retouch first, and then still have the wherewithal to turn back again and make it to second safely.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

IMO, the "last time by" concept contradicts the requirement to touch bases in the proper order. If one must touch first, second, third, then return order must third, second, first. If one must retreat to first and misses second, the only way to remedy would be to go back to touch second, AND THEN go back to first again; only after retouching ALL in the proper order could one again advance to second and be safe there.

At least, that's how I learned it; and the case plays in all these posts above seem to lean in that direction.

Don't disagree. Explaining it to a player or coach may not be so simple

[jmkupka]

"how can you appeal a runner missing a base upon which s/he is standing?"

As easily as explaining why a score wouldn't count when a runner clearly crossed the plate.

[CecilOne]

Two (maybe three) of you are confusing me, and definitely NOT Steve.

[Insane Blue]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

Two (maybe three) of you are confusing me, and definitely NOT Steve.

By any chance is one of them the man in the mirror

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Insane Blue

By any chance is one of them the man in the mirror

Usually is , so I'll ask him.

[teebob21]

For what it's worth, I don't even think that "last time by" is a valid rule interpretation in that other game with the small white ball and the deep fences, under OBR. (I can't speak to other rulesets as the closest I get to that game is the third deck at Chase Field).

If MLB Video hadn't become so hard to search after their website re-design, I'm sure there are examples available from this season, and if not, I know there was at least two missed base appeals on video from the 2016 season.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

IMO, the "last time by" concept contradicts the requirement to touch bases in the proper order. If one must touch first, second, third, then return order must third, second, first. If one must retreat to first and misses second, the only way to remedy would be to go back to touch second, AND THEN go back to first again;

Okay, let's stop and handle this play except the runner stops on 2B. The defense appeals the runner missed 2B.

Your call is?

[CecilOne]

There seems to be enough to say about this if we just stick to softball.

Again, what is so hard about this from Steve above and as the rules read?

" If one must touch first, second, third, then return order must third, second, first. If one must retreat to first and misses second, the only way to remedy would be to go back to touch second, AND THEN go back to first again; only after retouching ALL in the proper order could one again advance to second and be safe there."

[youngump]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Okay, let's stop and handle this play except the runner stops on 2B. The defense appeals the runner missed 2B.

Your call is?

She didn't miss second. She missed first. I would assume that she got distracted by a butterfly while attempting to complete Manny's steps for properly fixing the miss.
Distraction to the meaningful discussion aside, the defense has to know what it is appealing. So this:
U: What are you appealing?
F5: That the runner didn't touch 2nd.
U: She's standing on second
F5: Yes, but she didn't touch it on her way to retouch first so that doesn't count.
U: Out.

would definitely work.

It's also never ever ever going to happen. I'm completely onboard conceptually with the runner being subject to appeal but hung up a little bit on the actual requirements of making that appeal.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by youngump

She didn't miss second. She missed first. I would assume that she got distracted by a butterfly while attempting to complete Manny's steps for properly fixing the miss.
Distraction to the meaningful discussion aside, the defense has to know what it is appealing. So this:
U: What are you appealing?
F5: That the runner didn't touch 2nd.
U: She's standing on second
F5: Yes, but she didn't touch it on her way to retouch first so that doesn't count.
U: Out.

would definitely work.

It's also never ever ever going to happen. I'm completely onboard conceptually with the runner being subject to appeal but hung up a little bit on the actual requirements of making that appeal.

Actually, it did to me about 15 years ago in a recreational league. Don't understand why you would be hung up on the process. The definition makes it clear that the umpire may not rule on such a play unless requested by the offended team. Should the defense not know on what they are requesting the umpire to rule? I'm not saying they only get one shot with a perfectly worded appeal, but should be accurate as to what is being requested.

[Crabby_Bob]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Okay, let's stop and handle this play except the runner stops on 2B. The defense appeals the runner missed 2B.

Your call is?

Coach, you're gone.