Runners on 2B & 3B, two out.

Ground ball to SS, BR doesn't run. R2 gets hung-up between 2B & 3B and keeps the defense occupied until R1 scores.

BR realizes that he better run in case R2 escapes safely from the run down.

F6 tags R2 and throws to 1B in time to get the BR.

Does the run score?

Yes, the run scores.
--------------------------
Rule 5, Section 5

"B. No run shall score if the third out of the inning is the result of:

1. A batter-runner being called out prior to reaching first base...
2. A runner being put out by a tag or live ball appeal play prior to the lead runner touching home plate."

Since the tag was the 3rd out and the runner scored before the tag, the run stands and the inning is over.


Yes?

[Edited by Alameda on Apr 8th, 2005 at 09:34 PM]

Alameda,
I'm with you.
mick

Interesting problem...does third out by tag nullify the need of BR to reach 1st base? This isn't an appeal as 1st base wasn't missed, I am guessing by the post that BR did actually go all the way to 1st. I'd vote with the run counts, but how to sell to defensive coach.

No run.

Why not? You know the drill..every angle answered.

because I dont care if christ comes back..if the batter runner does not reach first base safely.... NOTHING ELSE MATTERS. NO RUN. Thats the easiest way to look at it.... avoid all the other window dressing..look at the basics....no runner safe at first...NOTHING else matters.

Gee coach, Your F6 missed that tag! BR out, change 'em up!

I'm with the big dawg here!
 

No run...force out at first is the key.

Score the run. There was no force out at 1B since the third out of the inning had already occurred.

"No run shall score if the third out of the inning is the result of:"

It does NOT say "If the third out of the inning RESULTS in the batter-runnner not reaching 1st" It says clearly "If the third out is the batter-runner being put out prior to reaching 1st."

The 3rd out of the inning was very clear here. Does the tag out suddenly not count?

I stand by my call, the run score.


[Edited by Alameda on Apr 9th, 2005 at 12:30 PM]

Score the run .
Why penalise the offensive side when the defensive side and coach was just plain dumb for not taking the easy out.

A force out is an out which can be made only when a runner loses the right to the base which he is occupying because the batter becomes a batter runner .

No force run scores

Im gonna have to back up and eat crow on this one. I didnt look at the entire situation. since the TAG was made for the THIRD out...any runs that scored ahead of the TAG would score.

"I'm sorry coach, the runner scored before the tag out, which was clearly the 3rd out. The rules are very clear that if the 3rd out of an inning is on a tag play, all runs scoring prior to that tag will stand."

From what I understand, I wouldn't bother telling him "Next time maybe your SS should throw directly to 1st". He'll already know this, and we don't want show the coach up telling him or his players how to play the game.

That's not our job.

"The rules are very clear that if the 3rd out of an inning is on a tag play , all runs scoring prior to that tag will stand."

Please, let's not open that can of worms. A tag play can still be a force out that keeps a run from scoring. The explanation needs to be that the third out his defense took was a timing play , rather than a force out.

I just agreed with him because we both have big feet! Score the run..especially if it is the go-ahead run! :)

Hi AltUmp.

OK, what I said was straight from the rule book:
Rule 5 - Section 5

"2. A runner being put out by a tag or live ball appeal play prior to the lead runner touching home plate."

I do, however, see your point and concern.

So, how's this version?

"I'm sorry coach, the runner scored before the tag out, which was unforced and clearly the 3rd out. The rules are very clear that if the 3rd out of an inning is on an unforced tag play, all runs scoring prior to that tag will stand."

Makes me think we should have the rule book ammended.
Thanks for the heads up though, this might spare me from some serious indegestion in the future. lol

[Edited by Alameda on Apr 9th, 2005 at 06:38 PM]

Doesn't anybody read the rule book? (Just kidding)

POE#1 APPEALS
M. <b>Fourth Out Appeal.</b> (2005, page 133) An appeal may be made after the third out as long as it is made properly.

The play described in the original post is a proper live ball appeal. (wait, keep reading, same page, but go up to letter...)

J. <b>Force Out.</b> If an appeal is honored at a base to which a runner was forced to advance and the out is a force out, no runs would score if it was the third out.

So, my conclusion A.) putting these together, the live ball appeal at 1B is allowed as the "fourth", or new third out, and thus the force at 1B neagates the run.

Or is it conclusion B.) Does the third out made by F6 on the runner in the rundown eliminate the force on the BR, and thus, the appeal is no longer a force out, and the run does score?

I go with my "A" conclusion. Run does not score.

Good question and making us think, Mike.

No run would score.

The out at 1B would be a 4th out, live ball appeal per POE 1-H,and M.

There is no appeal!

What is your basis for appeal? Missing a base? not tagging up?

To steal someone else's phrase: "What a bunch of hooey!"

Speaking ASA (and even though I believe the ISF guys will disagree, I believe this would be accepted by the officials in charge), (also assuming new regime has not reversed anything put forth by the predecessors)

The run does not score. As long as the play is continuous, ASA will allow the defense to stop the run from scoring by putting out a runner at 1B even after a tag had been made previously for a third out during that play. What would not be acceptable in this scenario is a defense who, after all play is obviously over, wants to appeal the BR not touching 1B.

F!

lol

OK mike, could ya lay this sucker out for me with references, please?

I don't want to get this wrong out there.

THanks.

Bluefoot posted the references (beat me to them!)

POE 1 has all the info you need to rule on this one IMO

Think of it this way, a force play is really nothing more than a live ball appeal, the runner has to go to the base and the defense is appealing they made the out.

tcannizzo,
That's my "hooey"

POE - 1

J. Force Out. If an appeal is honored at a base to which a runner was forced to advance and the out is a forced out, no runs would score if it was the third out. If a forced runner, after touching the next base, retreats for any reason towards the base he had first occupied, the force play is reinstated and he may again be put out if the defense tags the base to which he is forced. If the batte-runner is put out or is the first out on multiple outs on the same play, this would eliminate all force outs. On an appeal play, the force out is determined when the appeal is make, not when the infraction occurred.

M. Fourth Out Appeal. An appeal may be made after the third out as long as it is made properly. (e.g., One out with runner on first and third. The batter hits a fly ball that is caught. Each runner leaves his base before the caught ball is touched. An appeal is made at first base for the third out. THe defensive team then makes an appeal at third base before the infielders leave the infield. The runner on third would then be declared out also, and the run would not count.
---------------------------------------------

I'm sorry I just don't see where this situation is addressed in those references. I'm not trying to be hard headed, I just want to understand this so I can get it right.

Please elaborate.

Thanks Jel and co.

No need to apologize for being hard headed, you obviously want to understand. While what you are looking for may not be spelled out, you can use the rules and reasoning to get "the spirit of the rule" .

My contention is the BR being thrown out at first is an appeal play.

If a runner leaves 1B early on a fly ball to right which is caught, and is thrown out at 1B this is a "live ball appeal". Why was the runner out? because she was "forced" to return to 1B, and the defense properly executed a play on her. If another runner had crossed the plate, and this was the third out, that run would not score. I doubt anyone will argue that.

What is the difference then in the BR being "forced" to touch 1B? The defense makes a proper appeal by making a play, and thus you have the 4th out negating the run.


The way the rule is written may be misleading if you let it, (such as the D3K rule which allows a runner to run on a D3K with 2 outs, only if 1B is occupied, if the base is open and two outs, well...).

I believe the intent of the rule (5-5, and POE 1-J) is to judge when a run scores on a "timing play" rather than to allow a run to score in this instance.

Also, not that this would make it right or wrong, but if you were to disallow the run on the field, I doubt there would be any arguement whatsoever. If you declared "run scores"...........

Great scenario Mike.

Alameda, Here is my understanding. Third out is made on the tag. But the 'fourth out' has further consequences so it is allowed. (The 'appeal' is that the defense is appealing the batter runner had not reach first yet.)

I have seen elsewhere that the scoring sections will discuss the <b><i>"defense choosing the more advantageous third out."</i></b> In this example, the official scorer would ignore the third out made on the tag, and record for the third out the play that was more advantageous for the defense. (I do not know if the ASA rule book does or does not discuss how this should be scored.)

I understand the idea and application of the 4th out appeal. But how do I know that the defense is appealing? On a missed base or leaving early situation it's generally conceeded as common knowledge that a throw back to that base is an appeal. But on this one I'd need to hear something verbal from someone. What's the level of play? 12U rec or 18U club team? I could easily see some kids not knowing what the out count was and throwing over to first with no appeal in mind. Am I awarding them for being lucky of for being smart?

Hmmm, I'm still a little lost. But unless someone can rebuke these last few posts, I should start tappin bigdawg on the shoulder and see if he has any crow left for me.

LOL.

I'll sit on this and see if my brain can digest it after I get some dinner in me! =)


***Edit: I posted this before I saw Little Jimmy's post. I still have life!!! hehe.

[Edited by Alameda on Apr 9th, 2005 at 10:03 PM]

Do you think when an F9 makes a throw back to 1B after a caught fly ball to try and catch the runner off she really thinks she is making an appeal?

Ok, The part that I don't jive with is the example in the POE is on a play where the offense commited an offense...no punn intended :/ (i.e. leaving the bag early...thus giving reason for appeal)

In mike's senerio, the offense did nothing wrong. Really the defense did nothing wrong either, just dumb, IMO.

And I also don't really see where it says you can arbitrarily ignore the tag out made on R2.

(at least we are narrowing down the foggy area between us lol)

Jel,

Yes. She may not know the semantics but she knows that if she throws the ball back that there's a rule somewhere that will get her a out.

I guess I'm looking at the original scenario to be analogous to this example. Routine grounder to the infield. Overthrow pulls F3 off the base and runner also misses first. Before runner gets back to 1st F3 picks up the ball steps to throw back to pitcher and by chance clips 1st wtih her foot as the ball sails back to F1. Award the appeal even though there was no conscious thought of one?

Here is my issue with this play; the appeal has to be done properly. You have pointed out this was done as a live ball appeal, but can we have a live ball appeal after the third out is made? I don't ever recall a libve ball appeal for a fourth out. It strikes me that, after the third out is made, you can only allow a properly made dead ball appeal, and that can't be honored without a verbal appeal.

Thinking out loud, now, in the manner that Henry would now pose; because I considered the appeal aspect before reminding we don't want to refer to a tag play, rather a timing versus force out.

Where are you guys coming from with an appeal play? There are only 4 conditions in which an umpire cannot rule on a play until requested - and this is not one of them. A tag play (on R2) and a putout at 1B are umpire calls.

Also, a fourth out appeal to negate a run can only be made on the runner that scored. See Rule 5.5.C

Also note Casebook 5.5.7 is similar to Mike's situation - run scores, next runner is tagged for 3rd out, and the B-R is put out at 1B for 4th out. The answer is that R1's run is not nullified which does not agree with Mike's continuous play assertation.

WMB

Not really. A "TAG PLAY" is, by common usage, considered to be other than a "FORCE PLAY". A force out may be made by a tag, but is not considered a "Tag Play".

R1..B2 hits ground ball directly to F4, R1 is tagged before reaching 2B. It's a "Force Out" made by a tag.

R2..B2 hits ground ball to F4, R2 attempts to advance to 3B. F4 throws to F5, who applies tag on R2. "Tag Play".

Basically, a "Tag Play" means the runner must be tagged, not the base.

There is a subtle difference.

Bob

***Hours later, Alameda stumbles back in...***


All I can say is that this is awesome, you guys are incredible, and I cannot believe how much freakin fun this is.

If we could ALL do this under one roof during a couple of rounds, I would gladly buy the first one.

(Ok, maybe not all, what's the age restrictions on being an umpire? lol)

This is one thing that makes me wonder how thourough the manual really is though.

Cause I still stand by my original call.

The run scores.

:P

Keep on talking I am still not convinced the run would not score .
I think you are on the wrong track as to appeals .
The question is
Is the out at ist a force ?
If yes the run doesnt score
If no the run scores .
Now if you hit the ball you are forced to run to ist so I would suppose it is a force .
It doesnt explain this as force in my NZ rule book in definitions .
Who has a ISF rule book that has the definitions .
Convince me .I am now erring to no the run doesnt count but ?

Why, in your own words, are you now erring on the side of 'no run'?

I just want to hear it regergitated from a converts point of view.

;)

Because of the force aspect !
No run shall score if the third out is the result of a force .
Like I said I need the definition of a force .

I dont care what yall say about this sitch anymore..if Im there making this call..no run scores. None of this has convinced me otherwise.


[Edited by rhsc on Apr 10th, 2005 at 03:26 AM]

Come on open up your mind , maybe you will learn something .
Hell Im as you can read I am rethinking my original thoughts.

Nope, sounds like you are easily swayed, Im not.
http://smilies.sofrayt.com/^/aiw/closed-topic.gif

Score the run.

The 3rd out in this scenario is the optional (or Fielders Choice) tag play on R2, therefore becomes a timing play.

Where does it state the defence then appealed to nulify a run?

And for that matter since when has a force play at 1st become an appeal play? Now if the BR had missed 1st base and the defence then appealed for that,.... Then we can apply the nulify the run on an additional out.

Why do some umpires go looking for trouble? it will find you fast enough.. ..

debeau - you really suprise me..
 

Since when have you worried about the 4th out once you have three outs in the innings?

Put yourself in the BU position. You have 2 outs, you expect the fielder to throw to 1st for the obvious (no we had better say the easiest) out, however you watch the fielders catch R2 in a rundown and subsequently make the tag on R2, then what - you go looking for another out?

I don't think so.. Do you? No way, you are heading back to the inter-innings baselines just as fast as the fielders are retiring to the dugout. The 4th out is not an appeal play so end of story. Put this one to bed.

:~

rhsc
NoI am not easily swayed I am open to ideas .
Now I am convinced the run does score it is timing .
A closed mind does is a like an anus if you dont open it you will drown in your own sh@@

Re: debeau - you really suprise me..
 

I put it to bed, just didnt score the run.
http://smilies.sofrayt.com/%5E/_950/dousing.gif

No worries .
On a different note where are you from .
I am trying to be friendly here so dont worry .

Forget where's he's from, that's for another thread!!

lol


The run scores.

Yea, its the friendly ones you gotta worry about where I come from.
http://smilies.sofrayt.com/%5E/0/maniac.gif
South Carolina and no run scores.

rhsc: I dont care what yall say about this sitch anymore..if Im there making this call..no run scores. None of this has convinced me otherwise

So what would convince you otherwise? You have obviously chosen to ignore the rulebook and casebook in favor of your own personal rules. You may be joking here, but if you are serious you don't belong on the field.

The only way to get a fourth out is to appeal on a runner that scored. That did not happen here. No fourth out!

Therefore the 3rd out ended the inning. Run scored before tag. Timing play - count the run.

WMB

rhsc, you wouldn't be talking to Spanky about this ruling would you? ;-o

To paraphrase my earlier post:
Does anyone hear acutally read the posts?!? (seriously!)

Again, the appeal falls under POE #1 J. Force Out. The BR was forced to touch 1B and did not do so before being put out by the defense.

Jel:

This does not constitute the runner being "forced" to return to 1B. Yes, in your situation the runner is obligated to return to 1B before being put out.

But the definition of a "force" is limited to the runners losing the right to a base that the runner is occupying when the Batter becomes a BR.

Little Jimmy:

It's called a Live Ball Appeal. Nothing verbal is required on a live ball appeal.

AltUmpSteve:

Where does it say that in the rule book? POE#1 M. Fourth Out Appeal. It states that an appeal may be made after the third out as long as it is done properly. It does not say anything about live or dead.

Mike described this as a continous play, so it's not a dead ball.

WMB:

No, it does not state that a fourth out appeal can be made ONLY on a runner who has scored.
Rule 5. 5. C. does state that
"No run shall be scored if a "fourth out" is the result of an appeal of a base missed or left too soon on a runner who has scored."

It does not limit the appeal to only the runner who has scored, and it also does not eliminate the appeal on other runners who are forced.

debeau:
Rule 8.2.B. states "Batter-Runner is out when after hitting a fair ball the batter-runner is legally put out prior to reaching first base."

I would call that being "forced" to go to 1B.

Re: debeau - you really suprise me..
 

nzumpire:

If you're never concerned with the possibility of a fourth out on an appeal, then if I were you, I'd read and learn POE #1 M. that covers it, or else, you just better hope that you are never faced with a situation of that type.

If you're heading to whereever you go between innings as fast as you can and not paying attention to what's going on in the game, you might miss the defense making a play that they are entitled to do to prevent a run from scoring.

By the same thinking, I guess it'd make about as much sense as running for your car as soon as you assume the last play of the game is made, without sticking around for what could be an "appealable" play. But that would require reading of POE #1 N. in advance too.

Opps I cheated again.

Run scores, Once the third out is made the inning is over and the run scores on a timing play. To late to do a force. The only time you get to use a fourth out is on an appeal play situation.

Let's try to get this back on the rails, shall we?

There is no appeal on this play. Look up the definition of an appeal play. Show me where there is one in this situation?

No appeal play. Forget it. Find something else to base your ruling on. If you actually disallowed the run scoring on the basis of a fouth out appeal, and it was protested, you would lose. Why?

Because there ain't no friggin' appeal play here!

Wow, this created a load of responses in quick order, didn't it?

Okay, I'll come clean.

I am aware of the casebook play raised by WMB. Even though we are no longer suppose to cite interps by "Henry says", that is basically where I got this from a couple of years ago.

Purpose wasn't to cheat people of runs or make every player run out every play, though they should anyway.

It came down to giving the defense the option of which out to take.

...And the defense made a bad choice by taking R2 first. :cool:
mick

I agree mick, the defense already chose.

rhsc
Sth Carolina . Isnt that where hillbillies come from .
I know I am stereotyping but you probably think people from New Zealand run round in grass skirts and are all brown .

Debeau, I was quite pleased to read of your interest in our section of the country. While SC does have a few rolling hills, the majority of the state is more flat. It has a beautiful coastline that among other things, is known for some fabulous golf courses.

I believe rhsc is from a town called Rock Hill. I lived there are one point and never quite understood it's name. I never notice a 'rock hill' while I was there. It is near the towns of York, Lancaster and Chester, and just south of Charlotte, a hugh U.S. banking center.

I am especially found of Charlotte. Besides being a beautiful town, they have a wonderful Mensa chapter that I love to meet with. http://www.mensa.org/index0.php?page=10

I can't see nullifying the run, despite the "Henry says" above. I score the run. I have the rulebook on my side (the 3rd out was a timing play, and the runner scored ahead of the out; there cannot be a LIVE ball appeal when the ball is dead (which occurs after a 3rd out)). I have the casebook on my side. When on the field, or when confronting a possible protest (which any good coach would in this sitch), if you have the rulebook and casebook saying one thing, and some guy named Henry that no one else knows (or worse... I would have, "Well, um, I read on the internet where some guy named Mike said that some guy named Henry said ....") - I'm going to land on the side of the rulebook and casebook 100% of the time.

A couple of points, one touched on above:

1) You CANNOT have a live ball appeal during a dead ball period.
2) This ball is no longer live, as we have 3 outs.
3) You can't have a dead ball appeal in this sitch to get an advantageous 4th out, as the 4th out in question here doesn't fall into any of the categories mentioned in that rule.
4) Those of you saying that a force play (or a play on the batter at 1st base) is LIKE an appeal play are really stretching things.
5) If this play was more bang-bang, and not on account of laziness by the batter (which seems to be the motivation of some posters to nullify the run here), the BR might give up upon seeing the true 3rd out made between 2nd and 3rd.

Similar play (nearly identical except for the speed and motivation of the players): R1 on 3rd, R2 on 2nd. D3K, R1 a speedster comes home and barely scores. R2, less reactive is then thrown out at 3rd as BR is 3 steps from 1st. BR sees the out and goes to the dugout instead of 1st (why would he go to 1st, there are 3 outs). F5 then fires to 1st as F3 touches 1st.

Do you nullify the run here?

You shouldn't - the rules don't justify it. And they don't justify it in the original situation.

While true, the issue is moot, since this is not an appeal play. The BR did not miss 1st base; the BR was "put out" (assuming you recognize the out) before achieving 1st base.

Besides, if a player wants to use the valid live ball appeal mechanics to indicate a dead ball appeal, he certainly can. Doesn't need to, but he can.

Appeals have no place in this discussion. Because, as you say,
In fact, this is not a stretch. It is fiction.

This is purely an umpiring decision, not an appeal. Do you recognize the 4th out for the purposes of nullifying the run, or not?


Just a side note: IF you were going to recognize an out on BR in this situation, note that she was already "out" before the throw... "goes to the dugout instead of 1st..."

Henry Pollard is not just some guy named Henry. Nonetheless, before I would use his interp on this in a game, I would need something in writing (like his interp on calling the runner OUT for malicious USC, which is not in the rules, but is in a HP-authored case play).

Could someone, who thinks the run does NOT score, give me a small paragraph on how you would explain your ruling (of nullifying the run) to the offensive coach?



THanks.

I understand the interpretation, all right. I just would not use it unless something is added in writing (case or rule book) to back it up.

A ruling by a member of the NUS is not to be taken lightly, but he needs to put it in writing for those of us not in earshot of his interpretation.

Basically, it is this: A continuous defensive play that throws out the BR at 1B as a "fourth out" is recognized and the effects of 5-5-B-1 shall apply the same as for the third out.

As I said - needs to be put in writing if ASA wants this to be used and to stand up to protest.

I certainly didn't mean to minimize Mr. Pollard in the least. But you've alluded to my problem. To Coach John Doe or even league admin, Mr. Pollard is just some guy named Henry --- especially if I can't even say, "I got an interp from Henry Pollard"... I have to say, "I got an interpretation from some guy (not to disparage Mr. Rowe either... but the people I'd be talking with don't know him either) on the internet, who says he got it from Henry Pollard."

Like you say - an interpretation that seems to contradict the written rule AND a written caseplay needs to be in WRITING to hold any weight come protest time.

mcrowder,
I must believe there is a reason that "personal interpretation" is not in writing, particularly if such interpretation was made "a couple of years ago".
mick