blu has amended his statement to include the word intentionally ... which I think we would all agree with.

To answer the question as to what it would take for me, as umpire, to recognize this as an appeal instead of just a touching of the base, it usually presents itself. I can give examples, but they would by no means be exhaustive:

The most common is players/coaches yelling at the player to touch the base again, the recognition on the player's face that he needs to touch the base, and then the touching of the base.

2nd most common is probably the player stepping on the bag a second time and looking toward an umpire or pointing at the player.

Anything that leads you, the umpire, to believe that he's touching the bag separately from the original play is almost definitely an appeal.

mcrowder,

I prefer to be called bawls, not blu. LOL.

Yes I did edit my post to include the word intentional.

Does anyone remember the Simpson's episode where Homer saved Springfield from total destruction when he prevented the power plant from melting down?

The request comes not in the players words but in their actions.

bawls, you're adding things that are not being said to back your argument. I think we're all pretty close on this one, but here's the thing...

An appeal has to be made; it does not need to be verbal, but it must be an appeal. If the runner was forced to the base missed, and the stepping on the base is intentional, but close enough to the runner's having achieved the base, then the umpire is left unsure whether that was a late force out attempt or a live ball appeal. The umpire cannot recognize an appeal he is not sure is being made.

The classic live ball appeal, where everyone in the ball park knows what is happening, needs nothing other than the tagging of the runner or the base from the defense.

But, if there is doubt as to WHY the defense is intentionally touching the base, whether that be was this a force or an appeal, or was this the first runner or the second being appealed, the defense needs to tell the umpire what is being appealed. Merely touching the base, however intentionally, is not enough.

So, if a BR passes the base before the ball gets to F3 and she catches the ball and without any indication to the umpire touches 1B, you would call the R out?

Good luck.

What about thios sequence - the fielder touches the base in an appeal situation, then the runner touches, then the fielder says some verbal indication of an appeal. All bang-bang of course, but also if not.

I don't use "proper appeal" as a way of playing "gocha" or "20 questions" with the defense.

A live ball appeal by its nature must many times be made quickly with the defense concentrating on making the play, not communicating with the umpire.

If, in my judgment, the player was explaining what she just did and why, then I'd recognize the appeal as properly made.

I can see some interesting scenarios deveoping out of this.

1. F3 who yells appeal every time she catches the ball on a close play at first, just in case the runner misses the bag

2. F2 who calls for an appeal at the plate after every "scrum" type play or collision (provided no OBS, INT, USC) just to make sure.

3. F2 who gets pulled off the plate by the throw as the runner is taking the wide slide for the hand tag but never makes it or slides too far off the plate to reach it so the catcher steps on the plate and yells appeal even though she could still reach out and make the tag on the runner whose forward momentum has stopped. Did the runner miss the plate or has she just not reached it yet?

We are not supposed to allow them to fish but if they are asking for the appeal, don't we need to grant it?

Let's remember the runner must pass the base/plate to make it an appeal situation.
#2 - good catcher

Good, I hoped you would say that. :cool:

That is a really stupid question that I am not even going to consider responding to.

[QUOTE=Dakota]A live ball appeal by its nature must many times be made quickly with the defense concentrating on making the play, not communicating with the umpire.

EXACTLY. So once the cathcer realizes that the base runner has missed the plate she can either touch the base OR tag the runner. Same thing and there is no requirement to communicate with the umpire because the umpire should understand the catchers intent because of experience, knowledge, and understanding of the game.

Especially when he only listens (apparently) to half of what you say.

I have listened to what you have said and I don't agree with you.