A walk is as good as a hit...maybe
 

Bases loaded. 1 out. Tie score, bottom of 8th. Count is 3-0. Next pitch is ball four. Runner from third scores, game over.

Or is it? Batter became a runner with the award of first base on ball four, but never advanced.

With less than two outs, this doesn't seem to me to be a big issue about the batter-runner not advancing (unless there is something I am overlooking). It COULD have been if other runners did not advance, but I believe the others did advance to their base. (I was not one of the umpires for this game, but was watching the tail end of it.)

With two outs, it could be a big issue.

So...what do you do as an umpire?
Does the defense have to appeal the batter-runner not advancing to first?
Is the ball dead as soon as the runner from 3B scores? Or does it remain live?
What of the runners on 1st and 2nd? If THEY don't advance, could they be called out?
If the batter-runner advances to first, but one of the other runners doesn't advance to their base, what happens?
At what point could a play or appeal be made on a runner (or batter-runner) for failing to advance?

And...what should the umpires do? They probably wouldn't want to give the whole thing away by their actions...

Didn't we just cover this a little while ago, or a similar situation? Or was that on another board? Yep, senility is coming on strong :D

There are a couple of selling points. ASA rule book states the runner on 3rd is entitled to advance without liability to be put out when forced to vacate the base due to the batter being awarded 1B on a walk. Does that mean the run automatically scores? Don't know, but can you sell it? :rolleyes:

As the umpire, I'm going to be watching a few things. Obviously, the runner(s), the infielders and then, I'll be watching what the coaches are watching. Once that runner scores, I will be looking for my partner to join me to exit the field and no, I'm not running. I'm doing exactly what the umpires are supposed to do. The time I'm waiting for my partner, or s/he is waiting for me, is a reasonable amount of time for the defense to make any appeal. As I stated, I will see what the defense's coach is watching, so I will have a pretty good idea if s/he has any intention of having a player make an appeal.

If the base umpire is on their game, s/he will not come dashing off the field on ball four, but execute the same mechanic as they would if this were not a game-winning issue. This will sometimes let the coaches know that you are looking for the bases to be touched. Same for the PU. Remove the mask and step out to an area which you will be able to see R1 touch the plate and do it with intent, not watching over the shoulder while walking toward the gate.

If an appeal is made, there is another piece of the puzzle of which the umpire must be aware. Does anyone "aid" the runner toward 1B.

However, like it or not, if the defense makes the proper appeals, and the umpire is still in position to make the call, it must be made. Here is where it gets touchy. Unless the runners are not in jeopardy and haven't left the field of play, they are still entitled to advance to the next base, by rule. So, if none of the runners were aided, the appeal cannot be valid until one of the runners have actually entered DBT and the defense still has at least one infielder in fair territory.

So, what do you do about the runner or BR entering DBT? That is not an appeal. (8-7-U)

By rule if the batter touches first and the third base runner touches home the game is over. What the other runners do on a walk is irrelevant. (with less than two outs the batter/runner does not have to touch first base and the game is over when the runner scores from third)

With two outs, if the third base runner or the batter fail to touch and enter dead ball territory they are out and the game goes on. Again, the other runners cannot be called out on a walk.

If either the third base runner or the batter/runner simply fails to touch and does not enter dead ball territory then the umpires should give the defense adequate time to appeal before the umpires leave the live ball area. The rule book says an appeal cannot be made when the pitcher and infielders have left fair territory.

Thread: A walk is as good as a hit...maybe Reply to Thread

Can you cite that rule?

Rule 8-5,A

Runners are entitled to advance one base without liability to be put out when forced to vacate a base because the batter was awarded a base on balls.

Rule 5-5 One run shall be scored when a runner has touched first, second, third and home.

And where do those two rules tell us that an appeal on R2 or R3 failing to touch a base they were forced to advance to is not a force out?

I think what Jim is getting at is that at the bottom of the inning in a tie score situation, one runner legally touching home means ball game. All other runners can miss bases, dance in circles or stand on their head for all we care. The defense can appeal all they want, but it won't do them any good as any appeal on a *succeeding* runner does not prevent the run from being counted.

Because when the runner hit home and the batter hit first the game was over.

You are mixing rules.

First off, a runner scoring apparent winning run does NOT mean the ballgame is over. Appeals on other runners can definitely cause a run to be pulled off the board.

Second - the rules quote by piano have nothing to do with this situation.

Third - the rule regarding an appeal out on BR or a scored runner have to do with FOURTH out appeals - and again ... nothing to do with this situation.

Ask yourself this - if this was a single, and not a walk, and R2 or R3 failed to touch the base they were forced to ... would an appeal at that base nullify the run? (Hopefully, the answer is "of course.") So ... what makes THIS situation different? The only difference on a walk is that they may advance without liability to be put out. However, there is nothing absolving from their responsibility to actually advance. If they miss the base they are going to, and leave the field of play, they can certainly be appealed for missing that base - and such an appeal would be a force out. And we all know what happens when a force out for a 3rd out occurs after a run has apparently scored, don't we?

Thank you.

I ask again - what rule tells you this? Where do you get these made up rules? Answer for us the question(s) I posted to NCASA. They apply to you as well.

jim's expression of appreciation notwithstanding, what about mcrowder's points?

I know there is a custom (especially in MLB) that in this situation the only runners that matter are R1 and the BR.

"By custom" is different from "by rule." jim said "by rule". What rule? And, the rule had better address that the other runners don't matter, or it is not the rule that pertains to what jim said was "by rule."

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.

I already cited the rules.

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."

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.

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.

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)? :)

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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

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

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).

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?

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

IF they actually touch the base, they have no liability to be put out. But, if they don't touch the base, they can be appealed out and the out is a force out if they were forced to advance because the batter became a batter-runner.

ANY rule basis for what you're saying here would truly be appreciated. You keep stating the 2nd paragraph as fact, with no basis. The first sentence is simply false.

OK, please cite the rule that makes the duties of the runners and the availability of defensive appeals different in a "game ending" bases loaded walk and any other bases loaded walk. Again, rule, please? The generic "run scores" rule doesn't work since that generic "run scores" rule is always subject to a valid appeal. So, your case boils down to these are not valid appeals because it involves the winning run in the bottom of the 7th.

Again, I say, rule, please?

No, the only thing he has changed was that the run that apparently scores is no longer an apparent game-winner. But the apparent runs scored in the situaitons are governed by the same rules. There are no separate rules for game-ending runs or even inning-ending runs. If you understand and agree with THIS scenario, it should easy for you to apply exactly the same rules to the original scenario, and in doing so, you would then rule correctly.

I'm still waiting for the citation of a rule which determines a game is over which terminates any possible appeals.:D

If you take my replies as "bombastic" then I apologize, but they were never intended to be.

I have cited the rules covering the situation as I see it.

If you prefer to honor those appeals at second or third you certainly can, but I never would.

Jim,

I think what Mike (and others) would be looking for is something like 8-7-R states "The runner is out if he fails to remain in contact..." blah blah blah.

The above rule is irrelevant to this discussion. Just using it as an example of what they're looking for. Since I don't have my book with me, I'm keeping out of it until later tonight when I can grab my copy.

I agree with you. I cannot see any relationship between the scenario started in this thread and those quoted rules regarding force outs.

I believe we're trying to be patient with you here ... You've cited rules. Several of us have mentioned that the rules you cited have nothing to do with this situation. Your response? "I've cited the rules." Us: "Those rules don't apply, please cite the rules that do." You: "I've cited the rules."

Give us the rule that supports your case ... or at least explain to us why you think the rules you quoted support your case.

Our honoring of appeals at 2nd and 3rd ARE supported by the rulebook. So why wouldn't you - and what would your defense be when your ruling is protested? Show us ANY ruling that either differentiates between THIRD out forced base appeals at 1st or home, and the same appeal at 2nd or 3rd. Or show us ANY rule that differentiates between apparent game-ending runs and any other run scored during a game. If you can't do either, then your position is indefensible.

But you can see the relationship if the run isn't an apparent game-ender? You just said you would allow those appeals if the run was not an apparent game-ender. What's the difference? Why can you understand one and not the other - they are the same.

I will defer to your argument.

In researching old case books I did find a similar situation in the 2005/6 book that talks about runners heading to dead ball areas on a walk. While the scenario is a little different, it does say that awarded bases must be touched.
This is a fast pitch situation.

Bummer... I was about to bet money that this thread would reach over 80 posts by the time I got home tonight. :)

Sometimes we're right, sometimes we're wrong. Sometimes, the rules are completely whacked. But we still follow them to the best of our abilities, and when we make mistakes, it never hurts to look it up and strive to be better.

Any time I have a "freak" play or have to pull out an obscure ruling, I *always* go back to the book later that night to make sure I was right. And if I'm not, well... Life goes on.

Mcrowder (or Bretman), help me with this, as I believe you also do baseball and/or, at least baseball rules based softball (Little League, Babe Ruth, Dizzy Dean, Dixie??). Am I incorrect in believing there is an OBR based interpretation that matches the previous statements by those who believed the run scores and end the game?

Not trying to reopen the disagreement, because I am secure in my understanding about softball, that the bases must be touched. Just testing my memory that this is (or may be) another undocumented difference between some flavors of softball. Kind of like whether a batter-runner who has received a base on balls is eligible to safely overrun first base, like any other batter-runner.

wow...on the news just now...a woman was arrested for blowing a .47 for a DWI...set a state record...and was out of jail 24 hours later, driving again...and had another DWI and another accident.

I think maybe she was the UIC who made some of these rulings cited in some of these posts. :D

I did baseball for a number of years back in the olden days (let's say 1970-1992), some of it at a pretty high level. And, yes, in OBR as long as the 3B runner touches home and B/R touches first, the game is over regardless of the actions of the other runners.

BUT...that's OBR. The fastpitch I work (ASA, Juco using NCAA rules, NFHS) require all runners to advance.

As several have pointed out in various ways, the batter is awarded first base on a base on balls without liability to be put out. It's an award, and the ball remains live (talking fastpitch here).

The rule book is also clear that the batter-runner must advance to first base because it is an award...and shall be declared out if they enter the team area or other DBT.

8-7-U says the runner is OUT "When a runner abandons a base and enters the team area or leaves live ball territory."

I would vigorously oppose any move to not force all runners to complete their obligation to advance. I have always been opposed to the OBR understanding that R1 and R2 don't have to advance. I have been opposed to efforts to eliminate the pitches for an intentional base on balls. In fact, a girl hit a triple during such an attempt in my game Monday.

Without going into some societal diatribe about obligations...I feel all runners must advance one base.

What I was looking for as much as anything else was advic such as that so eloquently presented by Mike. If anyone else would like to chime in on the mechanics of that situation, please, feel free.

And thank you to everyone for your contributions. Even the stuff that is wrong helps us all understand.;)

This is what I just don't understand. If you are not going to worry about the other runners, why worry about the BR? That is about as stupid (yes, I said "stupid") as the organizations that do not require players to run out an over-the-fence HR (SP), but make the BR and all R advance one base and then sit down.

OBR's rule is much like jim thought it was in ASA. I'd have to look up FED again to know theirs for sure.

Ask Fred Merkle, 1908 New York Giants. He missed 2B. Does matter. He ended up becoming a Viagra spokesman.

Yep, actually Merkle didn't advance to second even though he was forced.

All kinds of interesting stuff about that play...and of course that season.

Hank O'Day, the base umpire who was almost kidnapped by the Cubs to discuss the call and determine Merkle was out and the winning run had not scored, had been a pitcher for several years, and was a manager in the major leagues.

Many umpires still worked one-man games in the major leagues at that time. Bill Emslie, the plate umpire, actually preferred to work one-man, but the NL president forced him to use a partner for the Cubs-Giants season. It was not unusual for important series and games to have two umpires, while other less important series and games used a single umpire. Neither league employed enough umpires in 1908 to use two umpires at each game. (I believe NL had 7 umpires and AL had 6...but it might be the other way around.)

The Giants have been to, and won, World Series since 1908. The Cubs have Steve Bartmann.

It is also interesting to note that umpires in 1908, according to accounts of the game, were not consistent in upholding appeals of this nature. There is also doubt that the ball used in the appeal was the game ball(one report had the Giants tossing the ball into the stands when they realized what was about to happen).

One thing we often let affect our comments on this forum is too much emphasis on the game situation, timing, etc. With some exceptions, the rules are written in the abstract, not specifically for any inning, or number of outs, or for game-ending, or for tie scores, etc. An obvious exception is whether runs count on third out plays, but that does not say anything about game-endings, tie scores or how the B (batter) becomes a BR (batter-runner).

I think everyone should go back and read IrishMafia's first post in this topic.