Overrun of 1st

[justcallmeblue]

In ASA Ruleset
Situation - Mens SP:

BR singles to LF. . .passes first base and makes a non-intent move to second. . .He is located about 15 feet beyond first base and at least 5 feet into the field of play. He non-chalantly walks back to 1B. . . .during that time, the throw comes in from LF to the pitcher who immediately throws to first. the Runner is heading back to 1B but is still about 5 feet behind 1B and a few feet towards second. 1B runs towards the batter and applies tag. My call: OUT. . .however is it the right call by the book????????

ASA 8-7-H says "BR leaglly overruns first base, attempts to run to second baseand is legally touched before while not in contact with the base"

There was no real intent to advance. . .however, the runner was in the field of play and has to be accountable for his actions. So you can cite 8-8-I - Runner is NOT out "When a BR overruns first base after touching it and returns directly to the base." (does this apply to being in fair territory).

To me, this was a case of DSB - Dumb "Stupit" Batter. . .but am i right?? . . .is there another rule to apply here?

[3afan]

Originally Posted by justcallmeblue

...

There was no real intent to advance. . .....

this answers your question ... just because the BR is in fair territory means nothing ... if no intent to advance, then BR is not liable to be put out

[NCASAUmp]

I think you contradict yourself here. 8-8-I is quite clear in that if the BR overruns 1B and makes no attempt to advance, he's not out if tagged. This is left to umpire's judgment as to whether or not the runner attempted to advance. You quite clearly judged that he made no attempt. If that's so, then 8-8-I applies to this situation, and the runner is not out.

He can turn right, he can turn left, he can be in fair or foul territory, he can do cartwheels all the way to the fence. If, in the umpire's judgment, he doesn't attempt to advance, no out can be called if he's tagged.

Also, take a look at Rules Supplement #37.

In short, I do not have an out.

[7in60]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

I think you contradict yourself here. 8-8-I is quite clear in that if the BR overruns 1B and makes no attempt to advance, he's not out if tagged. This is left to umpire's judgment as to whether or not the runner attempted to advance. You quite clearly judged that he made no attempt. If that's so, then 8-8-I applies to this situation, and the runner is not out.

He can turn right, he can turn left, he can be in fair or foul territory, he can do cartwheels all the way to the fence. If, in the umpire's judgment, he doesn't attempt to advance, no out can be called if he's tagged.

Also, take a look at Rules Supplement #37.

In short, I do not have an out.

Agreed. I like when the defense makes this play because it allows me to clarify the rule.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by 7in60

Agreed. I like when the defense makes this play because it allows me to clarify the rule.

Well, I like it when the defense makes this play at the request of the coaches. It lets me know which coaches are more full of "it" than others.

[greymule]

Be careful on this one, though. In general, you can go by intent, but if the BR overruns 1B and from the line takes two steps out into the field, he's in jeopardy. I admit it's a HTBT, but lack of intent can be overridden by just plain dumb running.

I had a play in a men's game where the BR was obviously not intending to advance to 2B, but he did take a walking two steps toward 2B after touching 1B (sort of a walking turn at 1B). The defense tagged him and I called him out. The offensive coach started talking about intent, but this was just careless running, not a normal overrun.

I had another case in a girls' FP game in which the BR overran 1B by about 8 steps and did not make any kind of attempt but instead simply turned around quickly to see whether the ball had been overthrown. The defensive coach told F3 to "tag her." When F3 reached out to tag the returning runner, the runner tried to avoid the tag by running around F3 several steps into fair territory. When the chasing F3 made the tag, I felt I had no choice but to call the runner out.

[Dholloway1962]

Originally Posted by justcallmeblue

To me, this was a case of DSB - Dumb "Stupit" Batter. . .

Yeah it was DSB..but bad call by DSU????? Just Kidding of course!! We all miss them every once and a while. That's why I won't call any play a player makes dumb (DMC, DSB, etc..), maybe nonsensical, but not dumb. They make mistakes too!

[SC Ump]

Originally Posted by justcallmeblue

... and makes a non-intent move to second. . .

I'm not sure I know what this is. If you mean he faked a move but you don't think he really was going, then it is just the same as if he DID attempt to go.

If you mean he just turned to the left, but did not attempt nor "feign" an attempt, then he is not in jeopardy.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by greymule

Be careful on this one, though. In general, you can go by intent, but if the BR overruns 1B and from the line takes two steps out into the field, he's in jeopardy. I admit it's a HTBT, but lack of intent can be overridden by just plain dumb running.

Don't confuse "intent" with "attempt". While intent to advance is not required, a valid attempt is for the BR to be placed into jeopardy. Every good runner makes an attempt when they round 1B with absolutely no intention of advancing unless there is a misplay by the defense. That doesn't mean the runner in not in jeopardy.

Rule specifically notes there must be an attempt. I don't care if the BR runs out and high-fives the RF, if there was no attempt (and yes, I know this is a judgement call) to advance to 2B, they shouldn't be ruled out.

I had a play in a men's game where the BR was obviously not intending to advance to 2B, but he did take a walking two steps toward 2B after touching 1B (sort of a walking turn at 1B). The defense tagged him and I called him out. The offensive coach started talking about intent, but this was just careless running, not a normal overrun.

If you make the comment openingly that you made in the first sentence, you may lose a protest with some people. However, leave that part of the sentence out, and I don't think there would be any queston of an out call.

I had another case in a girls' FP game in which the BR overran 1B by about 8 steps and did not make any kind of attempt but instead simply turned around quickly to see whether the ball had been overthrown. The defensive coach told F3 to "tag her." When F3 reached out to tag the returning runner, the runner tried to avoid the tag by running around F3 several steps into fair territory. When the chasing F3 made the tag, I felt I had no choice but to call the runner out.

While this is more difficult, I still wouldn't call the runner out in this situation. The runner simply reacted to the defense's play that shouldn't have happened. If this were allowed, F3 would chase every BR which overran 1B and expect an out call if the runner made any attempt to avoid the inappropriate tag.

[Dholloway1962]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Don't confuse "intent" with "attempt". While intent to advance is not required, a valid attempt is for the BR to be placed into jeopardy.

That's an excellent point...never really considered the differences in those words.