Live ball appeal
 

Speaking ASA

Runners on 1B & 2B, two outs.

Batter hits grounder bobbled by F4 who recovers to make a late attempt to retire the BR.

The BR hits the white base prior to the ball arriving. The catcher immediately appeals the BR missing the correct base (to PU) as the late throw arrives with F3 still in contact with the base. BU makes a "safe" call when the ball arrives and F3 continues the play with a wild throw to 3B in an effort to retire R2 and both runners apparently score.

Your call/ruling?

1. Obvious late call (mentioned twice), so my judgement is no play is being made on the BR. BR can use the white. Appeal not granted. 8.2.M(3)
2. F2 didn't have the ball anyway - live ball appeal not heard. Safe at first, 2 runs score. R/S 1(B).

No, this reads slower than it happened. There was an apparent play coming, BR just beat the throw.

Appeal not granted. F3's foot on the bag in this situation is what I would call an "appeal by accident." Unless F3 says, "wrong bag, blue," I've got nothing. Live appeals must be made by the defensive player in possession of the ball.

Though I must say, this brings up an interesting question. F3, in all likelihood, has no clue which bag the BR touched. They're watching the incoming throw, or else someone gets beaned in the head. The only likely persons to see this are either F2 or maybe F10. Should it be changed so that this type of appeal is allowed? Otherwise, who the heck is even going to MAKE the appeal? F2 can only yell to F3 to appeal the call.

Honestly, I've NEVER had this appealed in any of my games, probably due to the reason that I mentioned above.

Then I stick with my second ruling - F2 didn't have the ball, therefore her "live ball" appeal is denied.

I think I see what you're getting at tho... 8.2.M(3)-EFFECT uses the language "provided the defense appeals"... which is somewhat in conflict with R/S 1(B)...

As your heading states, this is a live ball appeal. That can only be made by a player touching the missed base or the runner with the ball. Too bad, catcher, being correct doesn't validate the appeal by someone doing neither.

Not a valid appeal, cannot be honored (or even responded to). Not really a conflict; "the defense" doesn't change the requirement that it be handled properly.

Just curious...what happened after the ball became dead. Did catcher appeal again? If so, wouldn't runs score and third out be called, assuming BR never "retouched" 1st base and continued on to 2nd?

A dead ball appeal is not available on this play unless the BR proceeded to a base other than 1st which did not happen. Also, no runs can be scored if the BR is the 3rd out of the inning.

Yep, I agree with Steve and Sean and anyone else who stated the appeal wasn't valid.

I kicked the call on a play which ended up non-existent. As Sean suspected, my mind was so wrapped up on the double base rule, I lost sight of the defender making a live ball appeal being the one with possession of the ball, although F3 made the same appeal to BU, but not until he release a throw toward 3B.

However, like I said, the play did not count, so the missed ruling had no affect on the game.

However, it does raise another question. What happens when a pitcher, catcher or any other infielder screams at F3 to "tag him" and then states aloud toward an umpire, "he missed the base". Obviously, as the umpire you know what is happening, but F3 doesn't have a clue why he is tagging the runner. Do you honor that one even though F3 is not the one verbalizing the appeal? :D

Well, I'm no mind-reader, so if I see an act such as the one you mentioned that is, in all probability, an act of an appeal, I might grant it. The lightbulb may have gone off in his head, and without verbalizing it himself, he tagged the runner. It is not an appeal "by accident."

Very grey area, as live ball appeals do not need to be verbalized.

They do if the umpire doesn't know why they are doing something.

If a catcher yells to F3 "tag him, he missed the base," and F3 does so, I'd say I have a pretty good indication as to why F3's tagging him. ;)

I don't have the rulebook near me, so I can't be sure if it says the live ball appeal has to have a verbal along with it or if the act of the tag is considered the actual live ball appeal.

Like I said, I just can't "see" the wording on this one in my mind like some of the other situations.

In ASA, there is nothing that says that for a live ball appeal to be valid, the fielder with the ball must say something. We grant it all the time - short fly ball to the outfield gets caught, but the runner on 2B left early, thinking it's a hit. Outfielder throws it to shortstop before the runner returns. Out.

In the second situation Mike presented (catcher calling out that BR hit the white bag and not the orange, then F3 tags the runner), I'd say this can be an acceptable live ball appeal. It's clear to everyone WHY F3 is tagging the runner, and ASA allows non-verbal live ball appeals. In this case, it's the "why" that's important.

Roger that, and I agree, but like I was saying, I usually can visualize words from books like that, but today is just not my day. Stomach flu/virus/plague is just killing my concentration right now...:o

No worries, man. That's why I don't attack people here. Hope you feel better!

To me, since the ONLY reason F3 could be chasing and tagging a BR who has passed first would be for some sort of an appeal, I think the mere act of initiating a tag in this case is pretty strong evidence that there's an appeal being made.

Correct. Never said there had to be a verbal, just noted that the statement "as live ball appeals do not need to be verbalized" is not absolute.

Have you ever had a firstbaseman tag every runner returning to 1B as a habit hoping to get lucky (with an out, not the runner)? Annoying as hell, but being routine, I would need an indication that he was indeed appealing the play, most likely verbal.

The key issue for a proper live ball appeal is for the umpire to know why the defender is doing what she is doing (tagging base, tagging runner, etc.) If there is reasonable ambiguity, then the defender needs to communicate somehow the purpose.

Turning and chasing the BR might be enough, but I've seen some F3's that routinely tag the returning BR trying to manufacture a try for 2B or something, I guess.

HTBT, but if it is obvious why, it is an appeal. If it is ambiguous, it is not an appeal.

Admittedly fairly new to forum...what the heck is HTBT?? driving me crazy

Had To Be There. :)

Took me a little bit, too.

thanks

So, in hindsight, how would you recommend this be handled? Would you, as PU, simply ignore the invalid appeal? Would you reply? If so, how?

I am particularly curious because it's happened to me with runners missing home and heading for the dugout. F2 receives the ball and verbally appeals the missed base, but the ball is still live but F2 never tagged the plate nor the runner. Should I be ignoring this invalid appeal? Or say something? (I don't want to acknowledge the appeal because it isn't one, but I also don't want to be coaching the defense here).