A walk is as good as a hit...maybe

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by jimpiano

I totally disagree.

A walk is not the same as a hit, because on a hit the runners have liability to be put out if they fail to advance.

Once the batter has touched first base on a base on balls the advance by the runner on third to home ends the game and there are no appeals that can be honored for other runners failing to advance.

Quote me a rule that says this please. Not a rule that has similar words. The rule that tells you that "no appeals that can be honored for other runners failing to advance."

[NCASAUmp]

I'm at work and don't have my rule book with me. I can tell you roughly where it is in the book, if you'd like, but being without my rule book right now makes it kinda difficult.

Take a look in rule 5, section 4 or 5. Find the section that deals with the "fourth out appeal".

As far as the dancing in circles, well... I've yet to find that one, but I'm sure it's in there. /sarcasm

But seriously, if I had my book with me, I'd give you the exact rule. Until then... It'll just have to wait until after my 3 games tonight. If anyone else cares to look up the one I mentioned, feel free.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by jimpiano

I already cited the rules.

You cited some rules... but how do those rules apply at all to this situation? I'm asking you to explain it, not just give vague statements. I don't mind if you can explain your way into this ruling ... because frankly I like it better than what the rules say ... but I cannot use the rules (any rules - not just the two irrelevant ones you mentioned) to justify your conclusion.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

I'm at work and don't have my rule book with me. I can tell you roughly where it is in the book, if you'd like, but being without my rule book right now makes it kinda difficult.

Take a look in rule 5, section 4 or 5. Find the section that deals with the "fourth out appeal".

As far as the dancing in circles, well... I've yet to find that one, but I'm sure it's in there. /sarcasm

But seriously, if I had my book with me, I'd give you the exact rule. Until then... It'll just have to wait until after my 3 games tonight. If anyone else cares to look up the one I mentioned, feel free.

I mentioned this. there IS a similar rule that applies specifically to 4th out appeals. Most of us here don't like it - but it's there. BUT!!!!! That only applies to 4th out appeals, not a simple appeal for a THIRD out on a forced runner. (The inequity here that a 3rd out at 2B in this situation can nullify a run but a 4th cannot is what many of us here DON'T like ... but it's there.)

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

I mentioned this. there IS a similar rule that applies specifically to 4th out appeals. Most of us here don't like it - but it's there. BUT!!!!! That only applies to 4th out appeals, not a simple appeal for a THIRD out on a forced runner. (The inequity here that a 3rd out at 2B in this situation can nullify a run but a 4th cannot is what many of us here DON'T like ... but it's there.)

So are you saying that appealing a runner missing a base is a force out? Which rule are you specifically getting at (that I can't look at just yet)?

[MNBlue]

ASA
Rule 8.7.G
The runner is out ...
When the runner fails to touch the intervening base or bases in regular or reverse order and the ball is returned to an infielder and properly appealed. If the runner put out is the batter-runner at first base, or any other runner forced to advance because the batter became a batter runner, this is a force out.


NFHS
Rule 8.6.7
A runner is out when
The runner fails to touch the intervening base or bases in regular or reverse order and the ball is returned to the infield and properly appealed. If the runner put out is the batter-runner at first base, or any other runner forced to advance because the batter became a batter-runner, this is a force out.

What these rules tell me is that EVEN IF the batter-runner touches first base, AND R1 touches home, R2 and R3 ARE required to touch the bases to which they were forced. If they don't, they can be appealed out and the out would be a force out, wiping out the run.

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

Quote me a rule that says this please. Not a rule that has similar words. The rule that tells you that "no appeals that can be honored for other runners failing to advance."

How can you appeal a runner for missing a base they had no liability to be put out on?

The runners are forced to advance because the batter was awarded first base.
But they are not liable to be put out.

The scenario is that the runner on third scored and the batter did not go to first.

With less than two outs the batter could be appealed but the run would count. Game over. There is no potential appeal on any other runner since neither was under liabiliity to be put out, i.e. forced. The run scoring was not predicated on anything other than the batter being awarded first base and does not need the other runners to touch the next base as it would under a batted ball with the bases loaded.

With two outs the run would be nullified only if the batter failed to advance to first.

[Dakota]

I agree, Mark, and that is also what mcrowder was saying.

Bottom of 7th, tie score, bases loaded, BR receives a base on balls...

No outs. R1 crosses home, R2, R3, and BR join the celebration failing to touch 3rd, 2nd, and 1st. Defense has 3 appeals available to them, and if they make all three, inning is over and no runs score.

You do the scenarios as to who touches, who doesn't and number of outs for variations on this.

I still have a question out there... what about the runners abandoning the attempt to advance and entering DBT. This is not an appeal play.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by jimpiano

How can you appeal a runner for missing a base they had no liability to be put out on?....

Hmmm....

Riddle me this. Suppose we have this same situation earlier in the game, so there is no game-ending scenario involved. F2 overthrows F1. All runners (who were forced to advance due to the base on balls) now take off, R1 scores on the walk, R2 scores on the overthrow, R3 ends up on 3rd and BR on 2nd. But, R2 missed 3rd (notice - the base she was entitled to without liability) and R3 missed 2nd (again, the base she was entitled to without liability). Would you not honor those appeals?

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

So are you saying that appealing a runner missing a base is a force out? Which rule are you specifically getting at (that I can't look at just yet)?

No, but appealing a missed base at a base where the runner was forced to advance (and still is at the time of appeal, depending on ruleset) IS a force out.

[jimpiano]

What these rules tell me is that EVEN IF the batter-runner touches first base, AND R1 touches home, R2 and R3 ARE required to touch the bases to which they were forced. If they don't, they can be appealed out and the out would be a force out, wiping out the run.
__________________

Again, a runner with NO liability to be put out is not forced to touch the next base to validate a run scoring.

In this case when the runner from third touches home before or after the batter/runner touches first the game is over. There is nothing to appeal.

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Hmmm....

Riddle me this. Suppose we have this same situation earlier in the game, so there is no game-ending scenario involved. F2 overthrows F1. All runners (who were forced to advance due to the base on balls) now take off, R1 scores on the walk, R2 scores on the overthrow, R3 ends up on 3rd and BR on 2nd. But, R2 missed 3rd (notice - the base she was entitled to without liability) and R3 missed 2nd (again, the base she was entitled to without liability). Would you not honor those appeals?

Of course I would, but you have totally changed the scenario.

We were discussing game ending scenarios on a bases loaded walk.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by jimpiano

How can you appeal a runner for missing a base they had no liability to be put out on? The runners are forced to advance because the batter was awarded first base. But they are not liable to be put out.

Not exactly true - they are "entitled to advance without liability to be put out". There is a subtle difference, and this difference comes into play in the scenario we are discussing. They MUST still advance. They cannot be put out while advancing - but they can be out for failing to advance (or for missing a base and continuing to advance).

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by jimpiano

Again, a runner with NO liability to be put out is not forced to touch the next base to validate a run scoring.

In this case when the runner from third touches home before or after the batter/runner touches first the game is over. There is nothing to appeal.

All I am asking is that you back up what I have highlighted with a rule cite. Not bombast, or simple declarative statements, or saying you've already cited the rules (because while you have cited SOME rules, they don't validate what I highlighted, above). Rule, please? Is that so hard?

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Hmmm....

Riddle me this. Suppose we have this same situation earlier in the game, so there is no game-ending scenario involved. F2 overthrows F1. All runners (who were forced to advance due to the base on balls) now take off, R1 scores on the walk, R2 scores on the overthrow, R3 ends up on 3rd and BR on 2nd. But, R2 missed 3rd (notice - the base she was entitled to without liability) and R3 missed 2nd (again, the base she was entitled to without liability). Would you not honor those appeals?

Thank you for illustrating the point in a much smarter way than I was able to.