Runner on one 1 out .
Hit to the shallow outfield which is caught . Runner has lead off before the ball is caught .
The ball is thrown back to 1st base before the runner returns and the fielders run into the dugout .
Any problems here ?
Think carefully .
ISF rules .

Im not ISF, ASA, but BR isnt forced-out after the catch.

OK, let's see.

Nobody actually appeals, so the ump makes no call.

The fielders, thinking there's an obvious out, enter the dugout.

The runner runs around the bases to score.

The fielders have all left the field, so it's too late to appeal. However, they still have to return to the field since there's only 2 outs.

Did I get it??

If I'm reading correctly, R1 on 1B, one out is the sitch. Hit to shallow outfield "which is caught" = fly ball, out #2. R1 was off base before tagging up, ball returned to 1B before runner returns = live ball appeal = 3rd out.

Sounds simple to me, maybe I'm missing something in what you are asking.

Not as long as the defense properly executed the live ball appeal at 1B.

The only problem to me seems the word "caught".
The runner may (legally) advance when the ball is first TOUCHED by the outfielder.

Did you mean this?

A.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
[B]Why would there be a live ball appeal at 1st?? Isn't it an automatic respeonse? Or maybe a better question would be... what would the mechanics be for a live ball appeal?

"Nobody actually appeals, so the ump makes no call."

Live ball, non-verbal appeal. Action of runner trying to get back and throw to 1B should be visual indication of appeal.

Like others, I have three outs; defenders to dugout.

WMB

Interesting response.
And similar veins to here in NZ
Whats an appeal ? ( A seperate thread of discussion )
A play which an umpire cannot rule on until requested to do so by a manager player coach .
In my view it doesnt have to be verbal , a look or holding the ball up is enough but it has to be indicated .
Simply throwing the ball back is not enough .
This is actually what I am getting at .
Yes it is an appeal play ( for some reason a lot of umpires called it out automatically over here until I chalenged their reasoning. Their answer was the act of throwing it back was enough )Lets be honest , most players wouldnt have had a clue that this was a appeal play .(Obviously neither do some umpires in NZ )
In this forum you did.
Antonella-- Too true and I did think about putting first touched but thought it may confuse and it is not important here .

A look or holding the ball is not an appeal without some indication (as you noted) of why the defender is taking that action.

As far as a throw back to a base left too soon, that is a valid appeal. If you want verbal, trust me, someone on that field has already screamed, "throw it to first, he left too soon!" If an umpire cannot figure out that this is an appeal, they may be on the wrong field.

Both sides
 

You seem to be arguing both sides of this discussion???

Throwing the ball back to 1st is absolutely enough and an umpire should correctly call the out. This is particularly obvious if the runner is attempting to return. (This sounds a lot like everybody knows what is happening except the official.)

Why would the defense throw the ball to 1st if not to appeal the runner leaving too soon?

Now, perhaps if the runner is not returning to 1st, a verbal request by the defense is appropriate. But it should still be obvious to the umpire what is happening... and if they successfully get the ball to 1st and then look to me as if expecting a call, I'm going to make the call even if they don't make a verbal request. There is no other reason for F3 to stand on 1st, catch the ball while tagging the base and then looking to me for an official response...

The players throwing the ball back to the base are doing so because they know the runner had left before the ball was first touched and that the runner cant do this .
I have chatted with numerous players and coaches after the game as to this and all were unaware that it was an appeal .Logically we cant give an out if the players dont know that it is an appeal play even though you think that the act of throwing the ball back is enough .
They all thought it was an automatic out .
No I have never heard a team member yelling throw it back unless the player has gone on to the next base and no I am not deaf
Maybe we need better education of players/ coaches

Well, I dont about anyone else here, but I learned something...could you tell from my earlier post?
http://smilies.sofrayt.com/aiw/haha.gif

You are arguing semantics here. They may not be aware that the term for what they are doing is technically an appeal, however, they understand the logic for doing it. This is plain and simply a successful live ball appeal. If you don't award the out, then you are splitting hairs, and for the wrong reason.

It seems like last year, or perhaps the year before, we had a long discussion about "inadvertant" appeals. Perhaps you have been confused. What you are saying now (I wouldn't stop at calling it 'semantics,' blatantly) is wrong.

By inadvertant appeal, and I don't remember the words we used, I mean for example:
Fly ball to outfield
Runner leaves early - umpire notices but no one else apparently does (no one says anything)
Ball is caught and thrown back towards the infield
Running action has stopped
First baseman collects the ball and inadvertantly steps on 1st as she throws ball back to pitcher
Umpire screams "Runner is out. She left the base too soon."
Everyone goes "WHAT???"

You are correct if this is the situation you are trying to explain. This is not a proper appeal. The umpire should remain quiet and wait for an appropriate verbal appeal. The players are responsible for knowing the situation. If they don't know, you don't make the call.

But our contention, and it should be yours also, is that if the defensive team is aware of the situation and delivers the ball back to first base because of that awareness, THEY HAVE MADE A PROPER APPEAL. And you should rule on it appropriately. And they show their awareness by intentionally delivering the ball back to 1st or by F3 collecting the ball and standing on 1st and looking to you for the obvious call.

If you stand there and act ignorant, you have a poor game sense. Additionally, by ignoring them you may be dissuading them from even making a proper appeal. They might think you didn't see it and then they won't even make the effort to ask.

If the throw to 1st base is at the same time as the runner is attempting to return, this is absolutely not an appeal play. This is purely a judgement call - did the ball beat the runner, and requires an immediate call.

Hope this helps!
:)

I was with ya right up to here. It is an appeal play. I must be misunderstanding you.

The live ball appeal does not normally need to also be verbalized. Everyone in the ball park knows why the throw was made back to the base, even though they may not know its proper name. An umpire who would insist on a verbal appeal in the situation described in the initial post is not correctly applying the rules on a proper live ball appeal.

This is not to say that there are NOT situations where the verbal must accompany the live ball appeal for it to be recognized. DDTB game an example. Here's another: BR bunts up the 3rd base line. Fielder snags the ball and fires to 1st base, but it arrives a step late. BR has stepped across 1st before the arrival of the throw, but did not touch 1st.

F3 does catch the throw with her foot on the bag. Even though technically this is a throw to the missed base, it should not be recognized as a live ball appeal for the missed base (it is more likely a late play on the force out) unless F3 also says words to the effect of "she missed the base, Blue" before the runner returns to the bag.

I'm sorry, but I seriously doubt that the outfielders have time to study the runners and keep an eye on each one while catching the ball to see exactly the base to which they need to throw the ball to get an out. I can tell you as a player, coach and umpire, someone is telling them where to throw the ball. You may block it out, but the outfielder is not making this decision on their own.

Quote:

I have chatted with numerous players and coaches after the game as to this and all were unaware that it was an appeal .Logically we cant give an out if the players dont know that it is an appeal play even though you think that the act of throwing the ball back is enough .

Most don't know the difference between obstruction and interference either, but that doesn't stop the umpire from making the call. In 38 years of umpiring baseball and softball, I've yet to hear a player or coach come out and state, "The catcher obstructed". Ten out of ten times, unless it is a player or coach who is also an umpire, it's going to be "the catcher interfered!"

Only once have I ruled interference instead of obstruction and that was because the coach was such a bonehead and argued with me that he knows interference when he sees it and I was wrong if I ruled obstruction. So, I gave him his wish can called out the runner that was knocked down rounding 1st.

Quote:

They all thought it was an automatic out .

If it were automatic, why would they bother throwing the ball?

Quote:

No I have never heard a team member yelling throw it back unless the player has gone on to the next base and no I am not deaf Maybe we need better education of players/ coaches

They get the rules. If they want to learn, fine. However, my experience shows many players have no place for rules. They believe what they learned playing sandlot ball or saw in the game on the TV the night before is the way every stick, ball and base game is played.

I find that many would rather argue how wrong a ruling is even if you read the rule to them verbatim from the book because it doesn't jive with their beliefs.

Shoulda just ejected the coach.. not called a girl out who wasnt out just because the coach was confused on the rule term and insisted on an out that wasnt an out... or something.

Bad call Mike.

Hey, does elite slow pitch umpire mean you can sell an out without dropping your corndog or spilling your beer?

*runs and hides*

(Just kidden Mike)

It was a tournament one of the local associations runs as a fund-raiser. The team with the idiot has always been an idiot and supposedly knows the rules better then anyone in the world because he was an umpire. Yeah, one year and bailed because he didn't always get his way. Also, had a habit of making rules up as he went along.

Nope, I gave Mr. Know-It-All exactly what he deserved.

Quote:

Hey, does elite slow pitch umpire mean you can sell an out without dropping your corndog or spilling your beer?

No, it means that an overhand out is sufficient enough of a sell call. BTW, would never spill the beer. Always put it down before making a call. Don't want to take any chances, you know!

Quote:

*runs and hides*

No problem, I can toss you just as easy from 300' away as I can from 10'. It just may take a little longer to reach you.

;)

phew i survived.

WTH, I've been known to widen the strike zone ever so slightly (just a little itty bitty) upon receipt of the evil eye from the batter...

So who am I to judge?

Bet he went running to the rule book after that.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by wadeintothem
[B]phew i survived.

http://smilies.sofrayt.com/sae/boxing4.gif
This is almost as fun as the games. Im sure glad yall respect each other, cuz there sure aint no luv.