Missed base appeals

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Speaking ASA, this is incorrect. The 2 base award is based on the position of the runners at the time of the throw, not the "legally attained" base.

You are correct and I apologize for making this thread even more complicated.

I was trying, albeit feebly, to help Bigsig understand missing second base(or touching second base) had no bearing on the award, since the runner was between first and second at the time of the throw.

I was trying to help

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Speaking ASA, this is incorrect. The 2 base award is based on the position of the runners at the time of the throw, not the "legally attained" base.

Okay.

The thread has had several left and right turns.

My last answer was a feeble attempt to answer BIGSIG on why the touch or no touch of second base was immaterial. Your answer is much clearer.

And thanks to the input of all I would answer your original questions this way, based on the rule book.

a) R1 misses 2B on the advance but touches on the return-No potential successful appeal
b) R1 misses 2B in both directions-one potential successful appeal
c) R1 touches 2B on the advance but misses on the return-one potential sucessful appea

Thanks for the challenge

[SRW]

Originally Posted by jimpiano

You are correct and I apologize for making this thread even more complicated.

I was trying, albeit feebly, to help Bigsig understand missing second base(or touching second base) had no bearing on the award, since the runner was between first and second at the time of the throw.

I was trying to help

Holy ****, JP has admitted he's wrong.

*pumps his fist in celebration*

[bigsig]

I was having trouble understanding the appeal.
Thanks to all for your help!

[greymule]

I was just being ironic, pretending that by following the notion that criss-crossing the base missing but finally touching it still amounted to a miss of the base, I got beat up for calling the runner out on appeal.

In the same way, IrishMafia was being ironic claiming that there have to be an even number of touches/misses after a retreat.

I did do a game between the Bad Boys and the Junkyard Dogs, however. They are two real (and aptly named) NJ teams.

I guess I should be careful, because once in trying to be ironic I got a whole lot of people mad at me on a political forum. After some horrendous crime in which two guys just released early from prison raped and murdered a couple of young girls, I got on a forum and claimed that there was evidence that one of the guys had once had to stand in the corner in kindergarten class, the other had once not been allowed to watch his favorite TV show, they both had led hard lives and been exposed to violence in prison, etc., and therefore weren't responsible for what they had done. I said that they needed hugs and classes in nonviolent communication, that it was really society's fault, and that the two guys needed education about rape and murder not being nice. I even claimed that the two guys had been diagnosed with HFS (human frailty syndrome). In short, I repeated all the bleeding-heart nonsense commonly heard in college towns like nearby Princeton. However, the people on the forum were outraged, completely missing what I thought was obvious satire.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by greymule

I was just being ironic, pretending that by following the notion that criss-crossing the base missing but finally touching it still amounted to a miss of the base, I got beat up for calling the runner out on appeal.

In the same way, IrishMafia was being ironic claiming that there have to be an even number of touches/misses after a retreat.

I did do a game between the Bad Boys and the Junkyard Dogs, however. They are two real (and aptly named) NJ teams.

.

Good. It seemed facetious, except you mentioned it twice.

[IRISHMAFIA]

No one in Princeton has a heart, they all bled to death