Two runners at a base

[CecilOne]

This happened last night in that other sport. Any rule comments based on softball other than the abandonment difference? If so, USA, NFHS, USSSA, etc.?


With runners at the corners, New York's Neil Walker hit a dribbler to pitcher Richard Bleier, who caught Giancarlo Stanton in a rundown between third and home. Gary Sanchez advanced from first to third while Stanton was hung up, and catcher Caleb Joseph eventually chased Stanton back toward third as well.

That's when it got weird. Stanton ran through the base and into foul territory, giving himself up. Joseph first tagged Sanchez, then chased down Stanton, thinking he'd turned a double play. By the book, if both Sanchez and Stanton had remained on third base, Sanchez would have been called out upon Joseph's tag.

Third base umpire Ron Kulpa only called out Stanton, though, and after the umpires conferred, the call stood. The ruling on the field was because Stanton gave himself up, there never technically were two runners on third base.
Meals said after the game that when Stanton ran past third base, Sanchez should have been ruled to have passed the lead runner — an automatic out for Sanchez.

"Then Stanton had the right to come back and touch third before being tagged or be called out for abandoning his effort," Meals said.

[RKBUmp]

Not buying the runner passing claim, if I'm following correctly the lead runner ran through 3rd toward left and veered off into foul territory, not back toward 2nd. No one passed anyone on the basepaths.

[jmkupka]

As soon as he runs beyond the bag 3 feet in any direction except directly towards home, he’s out of the basepath and immediately out. If he breaks to the right he’s running the bases in reverse order, making a travesty of the game, and immediately out.
Sanchez didn’t do anything wrong by standing there and unless he was he was tagged at the split second Stanton was on the base then he would not be out.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

As soon as he runs beyond the bag 3 feet in any direction except directly towards home, he’s out of the basepath and immediately out.

If avoiding a tag, likely in this case, but required.

Originally Posted by jmkupka

Sanchez didn’t do anything wrong by standing there and unless he was he was tagged at the split second Stanton was on the base then he would not be out.

Stanton is entitled to that base until he is out.

[jmkupka]

he's entitled to it, but my point is, Sanchez has to be tagged at the moment Stanton is on the bag. Sounds like Stanton overran it, so that moment is small.

I'm guessing, once he's on the "far side" of 3b (away from HP), fair or foul, he can be considered running the bases in reverse order, and the fielder shouldn't be required to pursue him past that point.

[Tru_in_Blu]

Maybe in baseball, it should have been a DP:

"According to the official rule, a runner may be deemed to have passed a preceding (lead) runner based on his actions, or the actions of the lead runner. The official rule cites a play where a runner -- like Stanton -- is caught in a rundown and races back to third base. Before being tagged, the lead runner runs beyond third base into left field, with the trailing runner -- Sanchez -- now in front of him. As a result, the trailing runner is ruled out and third base is left unoccupied."

When I watched the replay, at no point in time were both runners touching the base.

I don't have that in softball unless someone can point me to a specific rule or case play.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

As soon as he runs beyond the bag 3 feet in any direction except directly towards home, he’s out of the basepath and immediately out.

Only if to avoid a tag. It was here, but it only applies of doing it to avoid a tag.

If he breaks to the right he’s running the bases in reverse order, making a travesty of the game, and immediately out.

Nope. Don't even think this.

Sanchez didn’t do anything wrong by standing there and unless he was he was tagged at the split second Stanton was on the base then he would not be out.

Stanton never re-touched.

Comments embedded.

As for passing I don't know if that has ever been resolved for the situation as it happened last night. I've seen it answered both ways.

[SWFLguy]

All goes to show you that "goofy" things can happen at any level of ball. This is something you'd be more likely to see in a lower level JV game. When it does your brain says, "what the hell was that?" It's why umpires get paid the big money.

[Manny A]

I've heard the argument that a trail runner "passes" a lead runner when that trail runner is physically closer to the next base than the lead runner. So when Stanton overran third (presumably down the foul line), he put himself further away from home than Sanchez, thereby putting Sanchez "past" Stanton. But that argument was under baseball rules; I don't know that the same thing would be ruled in softball.

As for abandonment in softball, I wouldn't rule abandonment on "Ms. Stanton" if she overran third base, because abandonment rules require a runner to enter DBT. Only in NCAA Softball does the abandonment rule consider a runner who demonstrates no willingness to run the bases by heading to her position or toward the dugout. She can be called out while she's still in LBT. But if this happened in a college game, I wouldn't immediately come up with an abandonment call here unless I see the runner head toward her dugout after overrunning third base.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by SWFLguy

All goes to show you that "goofy" things can happen at any level of ball. This is something you'd be more likely to see in a lower level JV game. When it does your brain says, "what the hell was that?" It's why umpires get paid the big money.

Goofy yes but Stanton's job was to stay in the rundown long enough for Sanchez to get to 3B. Defense misplayed the rundown and caused the goofy thing.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

he's entitled to it, but my point is, Sanchez has to be tagged at the moment Stanton is on the bag. Sounds like Stanton overran it, so that moment is small.

OK, still ignoring the abandonment difference and the passing or not; does the bolded apply?

I think the lead runner (Stanton) "owns" the base as long as not advanced to the next base/plate.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

OK, still ignoring the abandonment difference and the passing or not;
does the bolded apply?

If both are touching the base one of them is out when tagged. Force play or not determinmes who.

[BretMan]

FWIW...here is the MLB case play that covers this.

PLAY—Runners on second base and third base with one out. The runner from third base (i.e., the lead runner) makes an advance toward home and is caught in a rundown between third base and home plate. Believing the lead runner will be tagged out, the runner at second base (i.e., the trailing runner) advances to third base. Before being tagged, the lead runner runs back to and beyond third base toward left field. At this time, the trailing runner has passed the lead runner as a result of the lead runner’s actions. As a result, the trailing runner is out and third base is unoccupied. The lead runner is entitled to third base if he returns to touch it before he is out, see Rule 5.06(a)(1), unless he is declared out for abandoning the bases.

This interpretation was just added a couple of years ago, in response to a similar play and debate about whether or not running past third base like that constitutes "passing a runner". The case play clarifies that it does.

[jmkupka]

Sooo... if this ever happens in our sport, can we use this as a guideline? Not to say that we'd quote this case play in explaining our call, but do we have a leg to stand on under our rules?

And:
Is the fielder with the ball expected to continue chasing the runner beyond 3B into left field? That was my earlier point, that the base path that is established by the pursuit is a straight line between where the runner is and 3B.
3 feet beyond 3B is out of the path, no?

Also and:
If Sanchez steps back off the bag when Stanton trots on by into left field, is he no longer considered to have passed Stanton? If he is, how far back would he have to step to not be called out?

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

Sooo... if this ever happens in our sport, can we use this as a guideline? Not to say that we'd quote this case play in explaining our call, but do we have a leg to stand on under our rules?

Of course we wouldn't cite this case play. But I wouldn't have any problem, if two softball players did this same thing, judging it as "passing". I've never seen any interpretation that says it wouldn't be.

I'm thinking of "passing" as which runner is advanced closest to home. Once the lead runner goes past third base like that, then the trailing runner is closer to home.

Originally Posted by jmkupka

Is the fielder with the ball expected to continue chasing the runner beyond 3B into left field? That was my earlier point, that the base path that is established by the pursuit is a straight line between where the runner is and 3B.
3 feet beyond 3B is out of the path, no?

Again, no problem with a base path violation, so long as a tag is being attempted. The lead runner is now between second and third base. As such, his base path is a line to either of those two bases. Straight up the foul line, toward the outfield and away from third base, is not the runner's legal base path.

Originally Posted by jmkupka

If Sanchez steps back off the bag when Stanton trots on by into left field, is he no longer considered to have passed Stanton? If he is, how far back would he have to step to not be called out?

Not sure why you'd think that. First, the passing violation had already occurred, so the trailing runner is already out. Nothing he can do at that point to change that.

If he did step off, now both runners are between second and third base. Which one is most advanced toward home? Or, which one is closest to third base? That should tell you which is the most advanced runner. If that's the trailing runner, then you have a violation.