10U ASA Question

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

Yes. (stupid 10 character limit....)

Prepare to eject a coach.

[IRISHMAFIA]

My point here is that if you insist the runner has scored and cannot "unscore", then how can you not call the runner out for drawing a throw when the rules specifically prohibit it?

You cannot have it both ways, either the runner scored or is still active.

Also, the rules permit for a runner to return to 3B after scoring if s/he believes THEY missed the base or left the base too soon regardless of age level. The rules even specify that this runner must retouch the plate prior to doing so or be subject to an appeal for missing the plate while returning.

I'm sure you believe this isn't the same situation, but I believe it is. Just because the runner is considered to have scored the moment s/he crosses the plate, touched or not, does not mean s/he cannot place themselves back into jeopardy basically because the rules do not differentiate home plate from all the other bases.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

You cannot have it both ways, either the runner scored or is still active.

I don't think either mcrowder or I am trying to have it both ways. I consider the runner still active (hence, no interference). He considers her as having scored (hence, interference).

My reasoning is the runner is not eligible to score, so she has not scored.

[rwest]

I agree with the consensus. The runner is in jeopardy on her return to 3rd. What if she did not return to 3rd? Suppose she went to the dug out? What are you going to do then? I'd put her back on 3rd. Why? Because by rule she can't score. By rule she didn't score. So, if as in the OP, she returns to 3rd, she is in jeopardy. The rule clearly states that a runner at 3rd is liable to be put out if she is off 3rd base. The rule also states that a runner who has advanced beyond the base they are entitled to is in jeopardy between those bases. In the OP, the runner is off of 3rd base and has advance beyond the base they are entitled to.

The rule book allows us to place the runner back on the base they are entitled to if they safely advanced to the next base. If they chose to go back on their own, they are in jeopardy.

A note to fastpitch: I also live is Suwanee GA. What association do you call for?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

My reasoning is the runner is not eligible to score, so she has not scored.

So, if the runner cannot score, by rule, and not in contact with a base, that runner is still in jeopardy whether she crossed the plate or not.

Is that what you are saying?

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

So, if the runner cannot score, by rule, and not in contact with a base, that runner is still in jeopardy whether she crossed the plate or not.

Is that what you are saying?

No, because neither is she "between bases." She is not in jeopardy unless she attempts to return to 3rd. Bizzare, I know. But it is how I read the 10U rules mapped into the general baserunning rules. My rationale is that runners do not stay in contact with the plate.

[mcrowder]

I can definitely see both sides of this, and DO believe that the powers that be should address what appears to be not only a grey area, but one where reasonably well-informed "rules-guys" can disagree 100% on.

From my POV, this runner has scored. She cannot unscore and is not subject to being tagged out after crossing home. It is her status as a "Runner who has scored" that keeps her from being tagged out after crossing home. A runner who has scored cannot unscore (again, excluding any runner who has other unfinished correctable duties such as returning to touch a missed base or a base left early on a caught fly ball). Since she can't unscore, she cannot be subject to a tag upon returning to third base (and would be subject to interference should she draw a throw when another play was possible).

Here's another issue I have with the concept of her being in jeopardy if a COACH tells her to return. Lets examine this play without the coach telling her to go back. She crosses the plate, and other play stops. As umpires, we send her back. We do not kill the play, ball is still live. If, say, a runner on 1st were to take off for 2nd with the ball in the circle while this runner was returning to third, we'd ring her up. More evidence that the ball is live at this moment. But we send her back, and NO ONE thinks she's liable to be put out as she's returning.

So why would we change this opinion solely on the basis of who the person is that told her to return to third? The coach is doing what he thinks he's supposed to do - telling his girl that he knows must return to 3rd that she must in fact return to 3rd. There's no reason to change the jeopardy status of this runner based solely on what individual told her to go back to 3rd.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

I can definitely see both sides of this, and DO believe that the powers that be should address what appears to be not only a grey area, but one where reasonably well-informed "rules-guys" can disagree 100% on.

From my POV, this runner has scored. She cannot unscore and is not subject to being tagged out after crossing home. It is her status as a "Runner who has scored" that keeps her from being tagged out after crossing home. A runner who has scored cannot unscore (again, excluding any runner who has other unfinished correctable duties such as returning to touch a missed base or a base left early on a caught fly ball). Since she can't unscore, she cannot be subject to a tag upon returning to third base (and would be subject to interference should she draw a throw when another play was possible).

Here's another issue I have with the concept of her being in jeopardy if a COACH tells her to return. Lets examine this play without the coach telling her to go back. She crosses the plate, and other play stops. As umpires, we send her back. We do not kill the play, ball is still live. If, say, a runner on 1st were to take off for 2nd with the ball in the circle while this runner was returning to third, we'd ring her up. More evidence that the ball is live at this moment. But we send her back, and NO ONE thinks she's liable to be put out as she's returning.

Speaking ASA, this is not true. The ball is dead when sending a runner back.

So why would we change this opinion solely on the basis of who the person is that told her to return to third? The coach is doing what he thinks he's supposed to do - telling his girl that he knows must return to 3rd that she must in fact return to 3rd. There's no reason to change the jeopardy status of this runner based solely on what individual told her to go back to 3rd.