I cannot imagine that you were one of those advocating accidental appeals.

Citation? It wasn't completely verbal she applied the tag. I don't think the order matters here. (As opposed to judging that she knew what she was doing when she applied the tag.)

Runner slides in at 3B.
Tag is applied.
BU: "Safe!"
Tag is held on runner as F5 says, "she left early"
BU: "Out!"

On that we all agree. Here's where I think there may be some disagreement.

Runner slides in at 3B.
Tag is applied but not held.
BU: "Safe!"
Without hesitation F5 turns to BU and says that was an appeal for leaving early.
Me: "Out!"
Some of you: **Crickets**

Oh no! I am just one of the knuckleheads who belong to the group, LOL!

MTD, Sr.

Maybe, with the "without hesitation"... but what if F5 walked toward you (calmly of course) to deliver that message, and the runner up 'n bolted back to 2nd?!

If the runner can get up and outrun the throw from F5, s/he deserves that base. :)

I agree there's an amount of judgment here. Above it seemed to suggest that there was none; that is that an appeal consisted of stating the reason and then tagging the runner. In your scenario, probably not since I'm with Irish that they should just tag her out. Let's take your scenario a little further into TWP territory. After telling me that she didn't tag up and me responding that's not a valid appeal(*), she sees the runner has bolted and throws a strike to F4. The runner gets in a rundown and after the confusion ends just beats the throw into third for a second time. I am not accepting that as an appeal even though she told me the violation and the next thing she did was successfully tag the runner. But if she then looks at me and makes a separate tag I'm calling the runner out for leaving 2nd early. It's obvious to me what she's doing with that extra tag. Similarly if the runner is well safe at third and then she makes a tag I don't need an extra verbal.


(*) Is this too much coaching? How would you all respond (if at all) to a live ball verbal appeal?

Unfortunately Irish, as we all know, likely as not that ball ends up in right field :)

Should have ruled the runner out when F4 caught the ball (assuming contact with 2B). You knew the intent of the defense and should have ruled on the appeal.

I didn't include that in my scenario. But assuming it happened, I think it's still a matter of judgment. Did the second baseman know what the appeal was for or was she just playing through a rundown. The fact that she didn't hold the ball and turn to an umpire suggests she was playing the live runner not making an appeal.

If it's youth ball the throw could easily end up in right field. :D

So you are saying that the player receiving the ball must repeat the appeal? When there is a throw to a base to appeal a runner left too soon, do you require an appeal or just ring the runner up because you, and probably all the participants and spectators, know the intent of the throw?

The only person who needs to know the intent is the umpire.

If it is adult ball, it can just as easily end up in right field. :)

Not that they have to repeat the appeal. I just have to believe that she's making an appeal. If she catches the ball and reaches out to get the bag, that tells me she knows what she's doing. If she brushes the bag inadvertently while trying to get the live runner between the bases, I'm more likely to judge that she didn't realize that an appeal was available.

As I understand the rule, the entirety of the matter is that the player making the appeal has to intentionally appeal the violation. If it's obvious what the violation is then we don't need any words. If there's ambiguity about what is being appealed we need to hear what it is. If there's ambiguity about whether it's a play or an appeal we need to hear words. I don't think we even need to hear it from the player. For example, if the coach yelled at the player, touch second because she left too early, then it would be obvious what the play at second was. But I don't believe you can unintentionally appeal even if somebody on your team is purposefully trying to appeal.