This came up on the baseball board, and I'm wondering what the softball people think. This is my own version:

Abel on 3B, Baker on 2B, Charles on 1B, 2 out. Daniels grounds to F5, who snags the ball moving to his left and decides to tag Baker for the third out. Baker starts back toward 2B and stops. Abel scores. As F5 is moving to tag Baker, Charles rounds 2B and subsequently passes Baker. F5 then tags Baker.

Does Abel's run score?

Variations:

(1) Baker retreats to 2B. Abel scores. Charles passes Baker. F5 tags Baker, who is standing on 2B.

(2) F5 elects to tag 3B. Abel scores. Charles passes Baker. F5 tags 3B.

In theory, when Charles passes Baker, the force on Baker is removed, and thus the out on Baker creates a time play regarding Abel's run. But there's something about the offense erring and gaining an advantage that just doesn't seem right.

How would you call it?

Without consulting the book...here goes.


The third out happens when Charles passes Baker. This is a timing play, not a force. Score the run.

Same answer as above.

Same as above.
I'm not following your question. In your original scenario, there were two outs at the start of the play. Once Charles passes Baker, the inning is over. I don't see how the offense is gaining any advantage by the trail runner passing the preceding runner. The defense has the option of putting out the BR going to first, thus not allowing any runs to score.

By rule, ASA Rule 8, Section 7, Article D, you must count the run. Yes, it's a error or maybe a very smart play by the offense BUT it is a very dumb move by the defense. Chances are good that you will have a protest with any ruling, I'll count the run and win the protest.

Variation 1 - same thing

Variation 2 - I'll take the force out, no run, 'cuz I did not see Charles pass Baker.

In your original situation, and in all of the variations, the third out of the inning is Charles passing Baker, so the run scores.

How about Variation 3: Seeing Charles pass Baker, F5 realizes the force is removed from Baker, so F5 quickly fires to F3. The throw just beats Daniels by a half step to the bag. What now?

No run. The "4th" out is a forceout, and nullifies the run.

I'm afraid I do not see a 4th out that is a force here. Where is it?

<b>How about Variation 3: Seeing Charles pass Baker, F5 realizes the force is removed from Baker, so F5 quickly fires to F3. The throw just beats Daniels by a half step to the bag. What now?</b>

In that case, no run. Fourth out made before BR reached 1B.

It seems that so far everyone but mcrowder scores the run. I agree that technically the force is removed, but it's still not sitting right. How about the stipulation that a team shall not benefit from violating a rule?

The force is off
 

Case book 8.8-16 ASA state "The force was removed when B2 was called out for passing R1. If the defense did not tag R1 advancing to 2B, R1 would be safe." So the force is removed and I dont believe you can apply 10-1L to this play. Though it is an interesting argument, I will be interested to see what others rule on that

I believe mcrowder was answering Dakota's post above where a 4th out was made on the BR at 1st base which would nullify the run



Don

[Edited by oppool on Jan 5th, 2004 at 05:25 PM]

I'm going with the flow. Count the run, the 3rd wasn't a force out. Even with the new scenario, where the defensive player throws to third, the runner has already passed the runner in front, ergo http://www.stopstart.freeserve.co.uk/smilie/up.gif the out has already ocurred before the out at third, so that play never happened.

Rick

Concerning the "fourth out" (variation 3):

I don't know if this woud be different for different codes. I do ISF Rules (being from Germany) and only have an older ASA Rules Book.
But I would not count the out being made at 1B as a fouth out since this is not an appeal. The third out of the inning was made when Charles passes Baker. Inning over. Outs only on appeals.

So in all cases: score the run.

Raoul

I don't have my book here at work. Can we call Baker out for running bases backwards..he started going back to 2nd when he was being forced to go to 3rd ?

No, there is no rule restricting the direction of a runner.

You are not going to find it in any rule book, but the interpretation is to allow the defense the continuation and consider the fourth out as the final out of the inning to nullify a run scored during the play. Since Henry Pollard and Merle Butler hold the same positions with ISF as that of ASA, I would only assume the interpretation would be the same.

It has also been reasoned that the throw to first after the third out is the same as appealing a runner leaving 1B and not touching 2B for a fourth out to nullify a run.

No. Runners are allowed to retreat to avoid a play being made on them (exception being the BR). Otherwise, all runners caught in a run-down would be immediately out.

Mike, I can somehow see where you Merle and Henry are coming from, but I don't see a reason for a runner to continue to 1B if the 3rd out is already made. So I guess I would just not read the rules that way.
And I don't see, why it would be the same as a Runner going back after he left too soon, since that is an appeal, but in the other case the "infraction" of the BR - not touching fist base (if it is an appeal) - happens after the third out has been made.

Raoul

Getting a third out on a time play and then a fourth out on a force play (or, in the case we brought up, BR before 1B) is covered in a baseball case play somewhere. The play I remember is:

Abel on 3B, Baker on 2B, 2 out. Charles grounds to F5, who opts to tag Baker coming to 3B. Abel scores. F5 tags Baker for the 3rd out, then throws to 1B in time to get Charles. Ruling was 4th out on Charles is recognized, no run. I would apply the same to softball.

In the original play in question, apparently the passing of the runner is the third out whether intentional or not, and it negates the force play, creating a time play on the run from 3B. It seems unfair to me, but the run has to score.

Raoul,

Maybe I used a bad analogy in trying to relate it to something else.

What the interpretation does is basically allow the defense the option of which out it wants to apply to the scenario which would always be a force out or a put out at 1B on the BR as that would always nullify any runs scoring on such a play.

I guess it should be noted that this only applies to the 3rd and any subsequent outs of an inning. A team cannot make the 2nd out with a force and the 3rd on a time play and select to use the force as the 3rd out of the inning.

Thanks,

My reply was definitely in response to Dakota's variation. In the original case play, there's no question there's a run scored.

I posed the scenario to a couple of other umpires, and all came to the same conclusion, but one mentioned something interesting. The out at 1st could actually be a "Fifth" out (ruling is still the same, but interesting nonetheless) if the 3rd out was Charlie passing Baker, the 4th was 3B tagging Baker, and then the 5th out being the BR at 1st.

I was wondering, since one of us will be the base-umpire and will make the call's. Ain't it easy to call the thirt OUT for the passing runner, then having three outs leavinbg the diamond for the next inn.?
So the players can do whatever they like you called the thirt out and dicided that the inning was over and done. Run counts!
As ASA-rules says, and our German-friend wrote, only to avoid a run a fouth out could be made by appeal! Thus not by getting out the hitter/base-runner...

love Alex

<b>So the players can do whatever they like you called the thirt out and dicided that the inning was over and done.</b>

Sorry, Dutch Alex. It doesn't work that way. Until the defense leaves the field, they can try to get extra (advantageous) outs.

Hey, when the defense gets a fourth out in an inning, are four putouts credited in one inning?

Memo to coaches: Teach your batter-runners to always, always, always continue the play until you touch 1st base... always, no matter what.

OK... how about these 2:

Bases loaded, same as the original scenario. R1 - R3.

A) Once R3 passes R2, and BU calls the OUT loudly, BR stops and turns toward dugout to get her glove. F5 throws to 1st. F3 catches throw and steps on 1st.

B) Once R3 passes R2, and BU calls the OUT loudly, BR stops and turns toward dugout. F5 tosses ball into pitcher's circle. BR enters dugout before the infielders have all vacated the field.

A No run, continual play.

B Score the run. The defense failed to make a play on BR.

Mike,

I try to understand the interpretation:
You write continual play. Does that mean, the fielder has to be in the act of making the play to 1B? Or can she also stop the action and then make the play?
E.g.: Umpire calls 3rd Out. BR Stops. F6 stops any futher action, starts towards her dugout, but than notices that the BR never touched 1B. Now she throws to 1B. Same thing, or different thing? If different how much time would be allowed between both actions?

Thanks

Raoul

I said continual play as it is all part of a single play being made by the defense. For example, if a defender reaches out and believes they touched the runner, why should they not continue with further play hoping the umpire saw what they did? The defender shouldn't have wait for an umpire's call to know whether to continue on with a play or not. Nor should the offense be able to violate a rule which would circumvent the defense's ability to get an out which would nullify a run.

You know what, this smells like a rule change proposal(ASA). I will submit a change which will add the same caveat to "passing/aiding a runner" that now exist for removing of a helmet during a live ball.