Your Call

[Dakota]

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
It also does not mention any players specific to the rule, either, does it?

This was a rule change in 2003 to clarify the runner assistance rule.

Do you, by chance, still have the comments that accompanied the rule change? I have been reading this to carry over the "definition" of physical assistance from the main rule, since it doesn't clarify one way or the other. Did they intend to say that no one (not even another runner) may physically assist a runner who has scored? If so, that certainly clarifies the situation Glen posted, doesn't it? And, also, I have been understanding it wrong.

[mcrowder]

And if so, the clinics I've attended are teaching it wrong, as we specifically discussed runners being allowed to assist other runners.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally posted by Dakota

Do you, by chance, still have the comments that accompanied the rule change? I have been reading this to carry over the "definition" of physical assistance from the main rule, since it doesn't clarify one way or the other. Did they intend to say that no one (not even another runner) may physically assist a runner who has scored? If so, that certainly clarifies the situation Glen posted, doesn't it? And, also, I have been understanding it wrong.

Consider this; if no one other than other runners can assist a runner without this rule added in 2003, what purpose would this rule change serve? Simply to make the ball dead? I would think this rule, as an EXCEPTION, is to mean no one can physically assist a runner who has scored, not even another runner.

[Dakota]

Originally posted by AtlUmpSteve
what purpose would this rule change serve? Simply to make the ball dead?

That is how I have been reading / understanding it.

[Dakota]

Originally posted by Dakota

That is how I have been reading / understanding it.

And, since the case book does not include a case play where another runner assists a runner who missed home, the closest case play is 8.8-21, where the ODB assists the runner. The ruling says

Dead ball. R1 rules out and run nullified. (8-7E Effect) Dead ball runner assistance only occurs after a runner has scored.

I took this case play to be illustrating the reason for the exception: i.e. a dead ball. If they wanted to illustrate that no one, not even another runner may assist a runner who has scored (which is the main reason for the rule change??), why didn't they write the case play having R1 score and come back to assist R2 who missed the base?

[Edited by Dakota on Jun 21st, 2005 at 12:40 PM]

[IRISHMAFIA]

Yes, another runner may assist. A player who has scored is no longer a runner. A player who has a trailing runner score cannot even retouch home if missed.

I know I'm not the only person who has heard the perfect two out runner assistance scenario.

If a trailing runner passes the preceding runner who has fallen, the trailer is out. Now, if the trailer helps the runner who fell to his/her feet, that runner is now out for being assisted by someone other than a runner.

I think you are making this much more complicated then it is meant to be.

BTW, I only have the comments the person who submitted the change (Glen Payne) which stated "to clarify runner assistance after failing to touch home."

[Dakota]

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
A player who has scored is no longer a runner.

While logic may say that, the rule doesn't. It says "not yet been put out."

I'm satisfied, BTW, with a ruling / interpretation that no one may assist a runner who has scored, I just had not previously read the exception to mean that, and I guess your recent post confirms that it doesn't - i.e. a runner may, indeed, assist a runner who has scored, assuming the runner can do that without passing or scoring.

And, the "debate" about whether a runner is still a runner after having scored is a bit anal and baseball-like.

Given all of this, here is the only scenario I can think of where a runner can legally assist a runner who has scored. R1 scores but misses home. R1 heads back toward her 3rd base dugout. R2 was also heading home and saw R1 miss the base. R2 deviates from her base path and gives R1 a push back toward home without passing her. R2 then follows R1 back to home and touchs right after R1 retouches. Legal, right?

Glen, how about the rest of the story?

[mcrowder]

Your scenario there is VERY similar to the initial post, and, if legal, would imply that the initial post's assist was also legal.

I REALLY want to hear the rest of the story now.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by Dakota

While logic may say that, the rule doesn't. It says "not yet been put out."

Tom, if that is the case, anyone who scored that inning could still be considered a runner

And, the "debate" about whether a runner is still a runner after having scored is a bit anal and baseball-like.

HEY, HEY!!! The anal part I'll own up to, but the other......shame on you.

[mcrowder]

"Tom, if that is the case, anyone who scored that inning could still be considered a runner "

Yeah... and that's the point. The rule doesn't seem to say that a runner who has scored cannot assist a previous runner. If the intent of the rules is different (and it may be), we must find it elsewhere.

I'm starting to find myself disappointed in the followup by initial poster though. I keep checking back to see what unfolded after the initial post.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by mcrowder
"Tom, if that is the case, anyone who scored that inning could still be considered a runner "

Yeah... and that's the point. The rule doesn't seem to say that a runner who has scored cannot assist a previous runner.

Proving a negative

It doesn't say that a runner which scored CAN assist. For that matter, it doesn't differentiate among all the participants, it just states that the runner cannot be assisted. Lacking specifications, I have to assume that if ANYONE assists this runner, the runner is ruled out.

[whiskers_ump]

On a runner who has passed a base, but not touched it. (And we all know that a runner
who has passed a base is considered to have touched it)

Though actually not spelled out in AFA, however, since AFA is 99% NCAA, the ruling was
That a player that has already scored cannot assist another runner. The same
ruling that ASA has under Rule 8 Sect 7 E. Exception, page 112. NCAA Rule 9 Sect 10d.

Sooo
Originial Post
This occurred in an AFA Championship game Sunday. (ASA rules should be same.) 18U

Bases juiced, 1 out, 2 & 2 count on the batter. She swings, ball hits dirt, catcher
delays, umpires states "strike 3", then catcher throws the ball towards 1B. Ball ends up in
RF, with runner from 3rd scoring. Runner from 2B comes in also. Misses the plate, umpire
signals nothing, runner that had just scored from 3B, picks runner that was on 2B up,
and moves her to HP. Runner is called safe by PU, time is then called.

At this point, what would your call have been. (Yes, there is more to the story,
however, would like to hear reactions to the above events first.]

By final ruling, we have R1 (at 3rd) scores, game was at that point tied. Umpire called
time at this point, R3 is now on 3rd and the batter at 2B. In ASA the ball would have
been dead, in NCAA the ball would have been live. The UIC
of the tournament allowed the
assist, so R2 also scored. This gave the batting team, visitors, the lead. However,
Home Team eventually won the game. In AFA the definition of a Base Runner is - An
offensive player that is advancing, touching or returning to a base. Therefore I do
not see how she could have been called a runner. Her duties were over when she
touched.