Force Play
 

Curious as to the ruling, and rule reference:

Runner on 1st, force at second, girl bobbles ball, has control of the ball in one hand tags the base with the other hand. Out or safe? Can a player tag the base with the hand that does not have control of the ball?

She can tag the base with the hand not controlling the ball in the same manner that fielders routinely tag the base with a foot that's not controlling the ball!

See the definition of "tag" under ASA Rule 1.

That is what I figured. It would be the same difference as a player tagging the base with her foot. Thank You

Just don't make the mistake that we had with a Rookie Umpire this season when a tag on a player was made with the 'Empty' Glove' and the Ball was in Control with the Bare Hand.

He called the runner out on the Tag.
I got called over and told the umpire that this was the incorrect call.

At post match he asked why if the D can tag the base with an empty hand and the ball in the other hand, you cannot do the same with a 'Tag Runner'

Hmm, "It's the Rule" but in a funny way it kinda makes sense what he was asking.

I say if these two instances of "a tag" are to be made consistent, we should require the bag to be tagged with the ball. Combine that with metal cleats, and we'd then have some fun! :D

Worked a tournament this past summer where the OP situation presented resulted in a protest.

R1 on first, two outs.
BR hits ground ball up the middle, F6 dives for the ball and catches it in her glove while she is lying on the field near second.
F6 reaches out with the non-glove hand and touches second base well before R1 arrives.

BU calls runner SAFE!!!!!!!

Defensive coach comes out to calmly discuss call. BU tells him that F6 must tag second base with her foot to get the out. DC goes to the PU.

PU agrees with BU call and reason!!!!

I'm up in the scorer's booth on my off game watching all of this, I saw the DC hand the PU money and said....we've got a protest!

When the BU came upstairs and told us what the protest was about, the site UIC, myself, and another umpire in the room just about fell over.

We told both him and the PU that they were wrong and to give the coach his money back.

These two guys did not last very much longer in the tournament

OMG
ROFLMAO - especially after some wine
Been there, done that, always glad to see that it happens to somebody else.

Let's add a wrinkle.
The Umpires huddle. PU disagrees with BU and instructs BU that he needs to reverse the call. But BU stands by his initial ruling. This should have no effect on the field of play should it since the umpires discussed this privately. But what about their cooperation on the field after this and once it is protested and the protest is upheld what about the rest of the tourney. Finally brethren, have you ever had situations where you and your partner disagreed on a ruling and how did you handle it?

One umpire can "instruct" the other all he wants, but if they're following standard procedures the call belongs to the umpire that made it. It is his alone to change or stick with and he can either listen to his partner's advice or ignore it. One umpire can't overrule another.

Any cooperation between the two for the rest of the tournament should be guided by these exact same procedures.

Have I ever had something like this come up? Yes, a few times. How did I handle it? Exactly like I described above.

We huddle, I tell him what I saw, he tells me what he saw, and then the umpire that made the call either changes it or he doesn't. If it's the wrong call, leave it to the coaches to file their protests and let the protest committee sort it out.

And we definitely talk it over after the game, far away from the maddening crowd.

Far from the Madding Crowd is a novel by Thomas Hardy. The title comes from a poem by Thomas Gray - Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard.

Maybe your crowd WAS maddening, or perhaps they were actually madding (frenzied). Or, possibly, both.

:)

Why did the BU have to go find the UIC? If I'm the coach (especially if I am paying for a service which should be free), I am going to demand the ruling be made on the field, not behind closed doors.

I would think the rules are clear and distinctively different in requirements. Tagging a runner clearly says tag the runner with the ball; we do consider tagging the runner with the glove holding the ball to meet that requirement.

However, the rules of tagging a base are equally clear, that the fielder needs only to make contact with the base while having possession of the ball. At no point does this require the contact to be with the ball or glove; just any part of the body contact the base. We have had (semi) interesting posts asking if a ponytail or shoelace would suffice as a point of contact; and, in fact, they would.

Since the requirements are clearly different, why would asking why they aren't the same make sense?

I was wondering how long it would take for the ol' ponytail and shoelace scenarios to arise. :D

I can just see it now. Runner misses the plate, catcher catches the ball at about the same time and falls down next to the plate, her ponytail landing on the plate for an "accidental" appeal!:)