hello

i really need some help in clarifying this situation. the bases are loaded and there are 2 outs. the batter receives 4 balls and as she is going to first, the runner from third is walking home but before the runner scores the pitcher notices the girl from second base rounded third and fires the ball over and she is tagged out. my question is does the run still count since the batter was initially walked.

thanks

tim

I say no .... untill corrected by a professional. Brian

The runner had not touched home before the "not so bright" runner at third was tagged out. No run is scored.

The run scores. The runners are entitled to advance on a base-on-balls, therefore the runner on 3B scores, no matter what. The runner rounding third, was not out on a force. This is not a timing play.

Bob

tim,


It is funny you should ask this question, and funny also you are from Virginia! Have you been talking with Henry Pollard? (also from Virginia)

Why is all this funny to me? The wife and I have just returned from our state ASA clinic (I mean JUST returned, about an hour ago!). Henry Pollard was the clinician, along with Kinard Latham. The weather was kinda rough so we did both days in the gym, but the group was so small this year we actually did a lot of rules stuff, and were encouraged to ask the "what if" scenarios.

The question you posed is the identical question posed to us by Henry as a thought question.

A couple of things to think about;

When the runner from 2B was retired was the runner originally at 3B still forced home by the base on balls?

The base on balls is an awarded base, but to whom? That would be the BR, other runners may move up if forced to do so!

When the question was first posed, I beleive we all said yes the run scores, the runner at 3B was "awarded" the base. Then Henry looked straight at me and said, "Let me ask you another question" I said (smiling) "I don't think I want to answer any more questions!"

We continued to discuss, and Henry did tell us ASA has interpreted this play as "run does NOT count", yet NCAA interprets as "run DOES count" (assumed to be based on the award of base on balls applies to all runners if forced).

I don't remember this being said, but the Mrs does, This was an actual NCAA play.

I am still gonna look hard at this play, cause I'm still a bit confused on it, I can see the case being made both ways but Henry's explanation was really clear as a bell. I just hope I never have that happen on the field!

I'd rather be wrong here than on the field. Do you have a rule reference on NCAA? I'll be looking.

Therein lies the problem! There is no specific rule or case play which addresses this particular play. These are just two different interpretations using existing rules. It is a play you will probably never see happen, yet (if I heard correctly) it did happen at the NCAA level. If that is true, surely there will be at least a case play coming.

The way Henry explained it is basically this way; BR recieves an awarded base on balls, the runners move up because they are forced, not awarded. The runner from 2B attains, then places herself in jeopardy by the over-run. She then is put out because the ball is still live, and she has no protection for an over-run such as one would have at first base. This happening before the R1 touches home negates her being forced home on the base on balls.

Henry then challenged us to show why this would not be considered a timing play, or why under existing ASA rules the run would count. If the out on R2 at third is a "good out", how can a run be counted if made AFTER the third out? It just can't be justified.

I do not know who made the NCAA interp, Henry mentioned Emily Alexander, but I'm not sure that was in reference to this play, but he was clear that NCAA had a differing interpretation from ASA on this play. I have no idea why NCAA would have a different ruling on this play, and count the run, but if I were told by my UIC to call it that way for NCAA, I would, or if there were a published interp I would call it that way, otherwise I gotta agree with Henry! He knows more about it than I do!

This is a timing play .
The third out is taken before the runner has touched home .
How can you give a run without touching home plate in any situation ?

Because all runners are awarded one base.

Bob

No
The Batter runner was awarded the base and the runners were forced to move because of this .
Once they have reached that base and moved past it they put themselves in jeopardy.
If an out is taken before a runner crosses home then a run doesnt count .
In your reckoning then , if there are 2 out loaded bases and a batter hits a ball over the fence and with gleefull joy two players carry the batter around the bases 4 runs would count ?

Theres no live ball sitch with that, there is with the other. You gotta do better than that.
Anyway, I think the run doesnt score cuz the idiot put himself in jeapordy and was put out legally before the fun scored, whats all the fuss. Nothing automatic, except to the batter awarded first.

I agree the two scenarios don't tie at all. One is live, one is dead.

But bluezebra is wrong this time (may be the first time I've seen that... it's at least the first time in quite a while).

The award is SOLELY for the BR. The book says the other runners may advance 1 base without liability to be put out. But it does not AWARD the other runners a base. If a legitimate out occurs prior to the run scoring, there is no run.

Yeah! I got one right.

I agree the situation is sticky, especially if the first time you ever think of the possibility is when it happens on the field and you are the PU!

I agree with the analysis that the BR's base is an award and that the ball is live (ASA 8-1-C), the other's are forced to advance and are not in jeopardy of being put out, and that runners may choose to attempt to advance beyond the one base at their own risk (8-5-A).

Therefore barring a ruling to the contrary, the run does not score. (I can find no case plays dealing with 8-5-A.)

Very interesting. I asked this question on the baseball forum as well, assuming we have the same rule in this case, but then I saw this from MLB rules:

"7.04
. . .

Play. Two out, bases full, batter walks but runner from second is overzealous and runs past third base toward home and is tagged out on a throw by the catcher. Even though two are out, the run would score on the theory that the run was forced home by the base on balls and that all the runners needed to do was proceed and touch the next base . . . "


Wow. And I thought the only difference between SB and BB was the size of the ball and the pitching. Nope. It is clear from the BB rules that the run counts, and it seems the consensus from THIS discussion here on the SB forum is that the run does not count.

Personally, I think it's fine both ways. You see, in SB the baseline is only 60 ft, so the runner SHOULD run home quickly once he is forced because of a walk. He didn't do it, and should suffer the consequences (no run).

But in baseball, the path is 90 ft, a lot longer, so if the runner didn't get home, I'd cut him some slack.

Just my $0.02 on it.

Shmuel

AAARRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!

What difference does the base distance make? Both runners have to advance the same distance.

I think it makes quite a difference. As someone who has umped and played both, it makes a world of differnce in the game itself.

In baseball, there is usually plenty of time to get the out at first, and as such an infielder usually has plenty of time to "look back" a runner. In softball, it's much quicker, and a mere glance is all that's possible, sometimes not even that.

Furthermore, this is one reason that leading off isn't allowed in SB. It's alot easier to steal a base from 60 ft. away minus lead-off than it is from 90 ft. away minus leadoff.

So, in this case, it should be expected that a Softball B3 should get home on time, and if not, then he's not running as well as his opposition is playing, and deserves to lose that run.

Schmuel is right...

When I umpire baseball at the plate, if a runner makes it ALMOST home, say 86 feet, before being tagged, I always call him safe.... cause 90' is just so darn far to run.

Here's a shock, I don't give a damn about baseball, I was discussing distances.

The time it takes the runner from third to reach home as it relates to the time it takes the runner from second to reach third is the same whether the bases are 60', 90', 120' or a mile. Both runners must cover the same distance, so there is no rational reason to support the statement below.

BTW, I don't care what game you are talking about, it isn't up the to the umpire to "cut him some slack", but for the runner to perform to the level it takes to win.

I hope this is a poor attempt at a joke
If now, jeez, please don't show up to work with me.

JMO, but no, it was not a poor attempt at a joke.

It was a pretty good attempt at a joke (of the sarcasm variety)! :D

IRISH wrote: "The time it takes the runner from third to reach home as it relates to the time it takes the runner from second to reach third is the same whether the bases are 60', 90', 120' or a mile. Both runners must cover the same distance,"

Hmmmmm . . . I see what you mean there.

That is, if R2 got to third and passed it, that means that it was possible, and R3 should have done the same thing, if he was running properly.

So, that means that R3, not having run properly (ie, fast enough), should suffer the consequences from that, and from the fact that the opposing team picked off R2, and the run should not score.

Correct?

And to be clear, I'm not talking about "cutting him slack" wrt a judgement call, like Mcrowder said. I quite disagree with MC on what he said (86 ft, calling him safe, etc.).

I'm talking about legislating a rule. From that point of view, I think we can take into account other definitions of the game (such as leading off or not, base distances, etc). For instance, Softball has a safety base at first, and baseball does not. Softball has the ball dead when the pitcher has it in the circle, but baseball does not. Slowpitch has the ball dead after a walk and strikeout, it also has a 65 ft. baseline (easier to hit the ball hard), things like that.

Baseball has explicity legislated this situation stating that the run counts. Softball has not, and it seems from the softball rules that this run should NOT count, the third out having been made before R3 touched the plate.

Personally, I think that SB and BB should have the same rules as much as possible. People confuse the two in any event, and players switch from one to the other. I mean, three outs in an inning, infield fly, foul/fair, three strikes and you're out, dropped third strike (FP), etc. Other rules obviously must be different: ball size, bats, gloves, field dimensions, leading off, pitching regulations, etc.

No, it doesn't. Why? Avoid confusion? Ha!

Good grief.

You really think I was serious, Schmuel? No, it was sarcasm.

http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/sp...smiley-004.gif

I am speechless to think anyone would think that MC was
seriouos with
his comment. However, I agree with Tom, it was good.

Actually, I think this was a very good and observant defensive play. I also think that this thread has lost sight of the original fact that R2 attained third base and placed themselves in jeapordy by advancing beyond the base. In that sense, distance between the bases has nothing to do with the rules or this interpretation. In ASA, as had been stated earlier, only the BR is 'entitled' to 1st base. Since the 'forced to advance' by the walk has been removed by the tag at third, the play turns into a timing play and therefore the run doesn't count.

Good God, what does it take to make a point around here without having to explain every posible angle?
Im begining to understand why people just want the answers, dont agree, but man its like trying to buy a car; almost not worth it.
Just kiddin..see what I mean.
http://smilies.sofrayt.com/%5E/a0/tease.gif

Mc,

Yea, I thought you were serious. Can't tell with text messages.

Dak, yes I do think the rules should be the same as much as possible in order to avoid confusion. When people get togetgher to "play ball", there are many many many confusions and carry-overs from one sport to the other. If we avoid making different rules as much as possible, then it makes things easier.

For instance, why should obstruction be different in BB and SB (ISF)? BB the ball is dead, and in SB it's a "delayed dead ball", with the blue sticking out his left hand, waiting for the play to wind down, and only then he kills the ball and makes whatever corrections are necessary.

Why not use the safety base in BB? Makes sense to me in SB.

Runner hit by a ball in BB - depends on if the ball has passed the infielders, but in SB (ISF) it depends on if the ball passed ANY fielder. But this might be different in ASA and other organizations.

Truth is, you can argue both directions in almost each case, but I still think it would make umping a tad easier if there was some sort of general tendency to make the rules the same.

OK so I cheated and e-mailed Billy P.

his response.
Speaking ASA
No. Once the runner rounding 3rd is tagged out it bcomes a timing play. The runner is no longer entitled home by being forced to advance on ball four because as soon as the runner rounded third and was tagged out it removed the force.

NCAA he's going to look it up.

The rules are not made for the convenience of the game official, but for the players and teams.

Also, they are two games with different size fields, different equipment, different philosophies and different rules to accommodate them.

If you cannot get pass the differences, you may want to stick with baseball.

Then you must also want to have the same rules IN softball itself! No Pony, NFHS, NCAA(AAAAAA), Fed, ASA, etc., enz. (NL), unsw.(Ger)... Just softball-rules by ISF!

IMHO this is putting ones head into the sands. It not there, if I can't see it...
As it was said before:"BB and SB are NOT the same!" If I want to play poker, I don't care about rules for Canasta. Even if you play it with the same playing-carts.

"Then you must also want to have the same rules IN softball itself! No Pony, NFHS, NCAA(AAAAAA), Fed, ASA, etc., enz. (NL), unsw.(Ger)... Just softball-rules by ISF!"

Actually, you have a point there.

A very good one, in fact. Actually, the more I think about it, the more I like it.

After all, BB has their "Bible", which is the MLB rules. But then again, they also have NCAA, and other bodies.

I know to little about BB to agree with you, but I think to know that here in the Netherlands we use CEB or IBAF-rules. And how they come to their rules is a big, big blank to me... They could follow MBL, I don't know.
Still I hate the idea that the MBL-org. is the God in BB!!!