Believe It or Not

[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.

[Bandit]

Just had a chance to sorta "catch-up" on this thread. Gonna have to think and absorb some of the thoughts about the ruling. Will comment on that later. About the handling of officials and the actions of some UIC's when it comes to "Sunday" assignments. Pre determined umpire assignments unfortunetly happen. Is it disappointing. YES. May I ask who the UIC was at this particular tournament? I was recently at the 12 & Under A in Bloomington IN. The tournament was great. Weather HOT. Umpire accomidations FANTASTIC. Umpire Care. GREAT. Congragulations to Valarie and all her staff of the Bloomington Visitors Dept.!

[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?

[LLPA13UmpDan]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

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

ok, lets just forget about it, and get a ruling from HQ

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by LLPA13UmpDan

ok, lets just forget about it, and get a ruling from HQ

I'm not getting you at all. I was asking you to clarify your statement - which is either just wrong or ambiguous - I can't tell which. Why do we need a ruling on a situation that is black and white.

Let me ask what I feel to be an analogous, but more easily understood example:

No outs, bases loaded. Batter pops to mid-range RF (not an IFF), and in disgust heads straight for the dugout and enters it. The ball is not caught by RF. Tagging runners take off, all 3 advancing. BR called out for abandonment.

Any of you folks sending the runners back in this sitch? Of course not. No reason to - the advances happened during a live ball. Just as the advance home occurred in the OP - during a live ball. The only difference (which protects the runner MORE than the scenario I described, not less) is that the runner is advancing without liability to be put out. If you're not returning the runners in a scenario where the runners are NOT protected, why are you returning them in a similar scenario where the runners ARE protected?

Let me ask another. Say the OP happened in the 1st inning (who knows why BR refused to go to first base and went to the dugout, maybe he thought it was strike three instead of ball four) - and BR goes to the dugout after a bases loaded walk. Would you put runners back in that scenario? Of course not - so why do you want to do so in extra innings?

[Rich]

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

Dan,

You've expressed your "opinions" on the baseball board (mostly incorrectly), so I'm not surprised to see you doing the same here.

I haven't worked softball in years, but Mike Rowe has shown that the ruling for this situation is pretty much the same as baseball. It's a live ball award. ALL runners are entitled to a one base award without liability to be put out.

I don't know the intricate details in softball, but in this situation in baseball ONLY TWO runners actually need to do something -- R3 score and the BR go to first. So the BR went to the dugout. Well, unless there's 2 outs, it doesn't matter. R3 still scored. In baseball (and Mike can tell me how softball rules this) R1 and R2 don't even need to advance to the next base cause technically they are not forced -- it's an award.

It's not what "seems" fair. It's knowing the rules and how to apply them.

--Rich

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

In baseball (and Mike can tell me how softball rules this) R1 and R2 don't even need to advance to the next base cause technically they are not forced -- it's an award.

It's not what "seems" fair. It's knowing the rules and how to apply them.

--Rich

Technically, all runners were "forced" until the BR was declared out. At that point, relief is provided the runners.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Technically, all runners were "forced" until the BR was declared out. At that point, relief is provided the runners.

So it's just another difference, then.

No big deal. I only read the Softball board for the situations and the game management posts, not so I can be a softball umpire.

[Mountaineer]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

So it's just another difference, then.

No big deal. I only read the Softball board for the situations and the game management posts, not so I can be a softball umpire.

Hey man, come over from the dark side . . .