Believe It or Not

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

OP: "BR goes into dugout ". That makes the BR out, but nothing the defense can do about the other runners.

You are correct. I got tied up in the "appeal" issue of the umpires leaving the field.

Once the BR enters the dugout, the force of any runner is alleviated assuming the umpires would rule her out.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

You are correct. I got tied up in the "appeal" issue of the umpires leaving the field.

Once the BR enters the dugout, the force of any runner is alleviated assuming the umpires would rule her out.

Well, this would only have an effect if BR was called out prior to the run scoring, and even then, the ball is still live. It would take an odd confluence of events to prevent the runner at 3rd from scoring (BR called out AND R1 tagged before reaching home). And even then, the wording of the rule still allows forced runners to advance without liability to be put out - I think you'd have an interesting argument on your hands if this actually happened - BR called out for entering the dugout and a tag of R1 prior to touching home.

But even so, there is NOTHING that would send the runners back to their original bases.

[tcannizzo]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

Well, this would only have an effect if BR was called out prior to the run scoring, and even then, the ball is still live. It would take an odd confluence of events to prevent the runner at 3rd from scoring (BR called out AND R1 tagged before reaching home). And even then, the wording of the rule still allows forced runners to advance without liability to be put out - I think you'd have an interesting argument on your hands if this actually happened - BR called out for entering the dugout and a tag of R1 prior to touching home.

But even so, there is NOTHING that would send the runners back to their original bases.

This is a perfect application of Rule 10. Put the runners back on base as the defense should not be penalized for indifference to the runner from 3rd being forced on the walk. Especially late in Championship play.

[argodad]

Originally Posted by tcannizzo

This is a perfect application of Rule 10. Put the runners back on base as the defense should not be penalized for indifference to the runner from 3rd being forced on the walk. Especially late in Championship play.

Aww c'mon Tony. The defense is being punished for the inability to throw a strike when the bases are loaded and the batter has a three ball count.

[Bluefoot]

Well then, anytime the offense walks with the bases loaded, F2 should tag R1 coming from 3B before R1 scores, just in case BR4 gets called out as in this thread's example.

Does the BR4 being called out for entering the team area negate the force on the other three runners to advance to their respective next bases? (or are they still entitled to advance without liability to be put out?)

If they are not entitled to advance without liability, then why shouldn't the defense try and tag the other runners 'out' before they arrive at the bases that they were originally forced to when BR4 walked, just in case a BR4 gets put out before reaching 1B as in this example? That way, the defense has a double or triple play (in waiting) in case BR4 is put out prior to reaching 1B. Now that sounds silly.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Bluefoot

Does the BR4 being called out for entering the team area negate the force on the other three runners to advance to their respective next bases? (or are they still entitled to advance without liability to be put out?)

I believe I already answered this question. Any runner forced to advance due to a batter being awarded a base on balls is entitled to advance to the next base without liability to be put out. There is nothing in the rule which negates this advance if the BR fails to safely reach 1B. (8.5.A)

[tcannizzo]

Originally Posted by argodad

Aww c'mon Tony. The defense is being punished for the inability to throw a strike when the bases are loaded and the batter has a three ball count.

By the way, PU kicked the call. It was down the middle and belt high.

And I didn't forget the smilies this time!

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by tcannizzo

This is a perfect application of Rule 10. Put the runners back on base as the defense should not be penalized for indifference to the runner from 3rd being forced on the walk. Especially late in Championship play.

Wow.

No, that's an obscene misuse of rule 10. Inventing your own rules where rules already exist that cover the situation.

Very Very Very simple - on a base on balls, the BR is awarded first base and all (ALL!!!) forced runners are entitled to advance to the next base without liability to be put out. Don't forget this is a live ball - had this not been the winning run, all THREE runners could have scored, although only the 1st without liability to be put out. Heck, with no previous outs, perhaps a smart coach would tell all three to score if defense was not paying attention. So even if BR is called out for abandonment, and R1 called out for missing home, the next run would STILL win the game for them.

There is NO RULE, and no logic, that would force runners who advanced both A) without liability to be put out and B) during a live ball to return to the bases where they were when the ball was pitched, merely due to a subsequent out on BR - the 1st out of the inning.

Honestly, I'm amazingly flabbergasted that you suggested this, Tony, as 99% of the time you are posting great responses on these things.

[tcannizzo]

mcrowder,

The UIC at the Nationals did not give the same response you just did. He said to the coach that he understood the concern, but that there was nothing he could do about it because the umpires had left the field. To me this implies that there was something more than what you are offering.

Otherwise, he woulda/shoulda said, hey, the ballgame was over either way. But he didn't, therefore leaving the wound open.

As for my logic, Rule 10 allows the umpire to make a ruling on a rule that does not exist. If runners are allowed to advance without liability to be put out because of a force on an awarded base to BR. The force was removed. The defense could have made a triple play on this as R1 and R2 were just "walking" to their awarded bases.

I could not just stand by and allow the game to end that way. I would put the runners back on the base and invoke Rule 10. I would defer to the UIC if and only IF the offense lodged a protest to my ruling. Then if the UIC would have told me that I have misapplied Rule 10, I would have graciously made the correct call. But down the marrow in my bones, I believe the game would not have been over at that point.

I may be wrong, but I never advertised that I was perfect.

[CecilOne]

The term "forced" in this situation is not quite the same as in a "force out" situation. It merely defines which runners advance. With runners on 2nd and 3rd, no one would advance. With runners on 1st and 3rd, only the runner on 1st is "forced" to advance. Only with bases loaded is anyone going to score on an award of 1st.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by tcannizzo

mcrowder,

The UIC at the Nationals did not give the same response you just did. He said to the coach that he understood the concern, but that there was nothing he could do about it because the umpires had left the field. To me this implies that there was something more than what you are offering.

Otherwise, he woulda/shoulda said, hey, the ballgame was over either way. But he didn't, therefore leaving the wound open.

To begin, the UIC should have been talking to a single individual away from everyone else. Sometimes, UICs need to handle the situation however necessary to calm the coach. It doesn't mean that any official ruling would placate them.

As for my logic, Rule 10 allows the umpire to make a ruling on a rule that does not exist. If runners are allowed to advance without liability to be put out because of a force on an awarded base to BR. The force was removed. The defense could have made a triple play on this as R1 and R2 were just "walking" to their awarded bases.

Rule 10.1 is not available as each part of this situation is included in the rules.

I could not just stand by and allow the game to end that way. I would put the runners back on the base and invoke Rule 10. I would defer to the UIC if and only IF the offense lodged a protest to my ruling. Then if the UIC would have told me that I have misapplied Rule 10, I would have graciously made the correct call. But down the marrow in my bones, I believe the game would not have been over at that point.

It's not your job to determine "how" or for you to "allow" a game to end. Obviously, you didn't leave your coach's hat at home.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by tcannizzo

The UIC at the Nationals did not give the same response you just did. He said to the coach that he understood the concern, but that there was nothing he could do about it because the umpires had left the field. To me this implies that there was something more than what you are offering.

If it implies anything, it implies that the UIC didn't fully understand the situation. His implication that "nothing can be done because the umpires had left the field" may have simply been a cop out, or perhaps a valid answer to the fact that the coaches never actually protested until later... I'm speculating though.

As for my logic, Rule 10 allows the umpire to make a ruling on a rule that does not exist.

There's the problem though - rules do exist that completely cover this situation. Any runner forced to advance due to the BB does so without liability to be put out. period. Nothing else need be discussed.

If runners are allowed to advance without liability to be put out because of a force on an awarded base to BR. The force was removed.

No, these runners are allowed to advance without liability to be put out. It says nothing about these rights disappearing due to a subsequent out on BR that removes a force. In fact, a similar situation was discussed quite a while back - with R1 and R2 on 2nd and 1st, BR walked and rounded the bag toward 2nd and was tagged out after rounding (who knows why!). Defense then threw to third where R1 was lollygagging toward, and tagged - ruling was that R1 is still "entitled to advance without liability to be put out", despite the force being removed due to the disappearance of BR.

I could not just stand by and allow the game to end that way.

What way?

I would put the runners back on the base and invoke Rule 10.

Why not just use rules 1-9 when there's an applicable one, as in this case?

[LLPA13UmpDan]

Im sorry...but that is weird there. I may not know ASA rules, but i know that doesnt sound right at with what happended. Game shouldnt have been over right there

[orangeump]

game is long over...I dont get why people dont understand this at all.....Batter runner is out, thats fine.

how many outs is that? ONE, correct? Ok, great. one out, run scores.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by LLPA13UmpDan

Im sorry...but that is weird there. I may not know ASA rules, but i know that doesnt sound right at with what happended. Game shouldnt have been over right there

Care to elaborate? Why wouldn't the run score, even if BR was called out for abandonment for the FIRST out of the inning?