Retreating from home

[youngump]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

This is a pretty good one. The status of a runner who has scored seems in question - but I dont know that that is the big the question. The big question is the score.

Rule 5.5.1 - A run scores when...

So are there any criteria which would negate that score?

There is no legit appeal being made, so there is no rule negating the run scoring .. ie the score is in the books. The runner could do any number of things, Interfere (were something else going on), get ejected, do a hand stand, beg the umpire not to score the score because they dont want to play extra innings and want to go home, purposely return to 3rd to prevent the score to prevent run rule.

But they cant.

It's in the book. The ruling on the field was essentially correct in my view, with the exception that I dont believe the status of the runner is the big question - the big question is can that runner do anything at that point to unring the scoring bell?

Barring an appeal sitiation, I dont believe they can.

Not having looked at 5-5-1 (I'm at work) I'd have to guess that even without an exception, you are expected to take off a score in this case: runner goes home and then goes back to third because she left early. She can retrace since no following runner has scored and she stayed in live ball territory. Now, once she retouches, the appeal violation is cleared up. If you don't take the run off the board, then you either expect the runner to stay at third and score twice or run off into DB territory.

Now, suppose I change that scenario a little bit. She did not in fact leave early. (Ball was bobbled in the outfield and nobody but the guys in blue knew the rule.) Are you still going to take the run off the board?
________
WildonGirl

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by youngump

Not having looked at 5-5-1 (I'm at work) I'd have to guess that even without an exception, you are expected to take off a score in this case: runner goes home and then goes back to third because she left early. She can retrace since no following runner has scored and she stayed in live ball territory. Now, once she retouches, the appeal violation is cleared up. If you don't take the run off the board, then you either expect the runner to stay at third and score twice or run off into DB territory.

Now, suppose I change that scenario a little bit. She did not in fact leave early. (Ball was bobbled in the outfield and nobody but the guys in blue knew the rule.) Are you still going to take the run off the board?

From my point of view, you are making the mistake of complicating this. Either its an appeal play, which is covered by rule, or a score, which is covered by rule.

You can flavor that anyway you like it and it still boils down to that.. but if you then go farther with your "what if" and add conceivable umpire errors, UFO's causing panic, malaria induced blindness of the PU, etc - that only muddy's the water.

I think the play is interesting because it seems logicially we should hold the runner accountable for obvious DMR (more accurately dumb move coach) - but I dont believe that position can be supported by rule in terms of negating a scored run barring appeal.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

From my point of view, you are making the mistake of complicating this. Either its an appeal play, which is covered by rule, or a score, which is covered by rule.

You can flavor that anyway you like it and it still boils down to that.. but if you then go farther with your "what if" and add conceivable umpire errors, UFO's causing panic, malaria induced blindness of the PU, etc - that only muddy's the water.

I think the play is interesting because it seems logicially we should hold the runner accountable for obvious DMR (more accurately dumb move coach) - but I dont believe that position can be supported by rule in terms of negating a scored run barring appeal.

There's nothing UFO-like about my scenario. If you have a runner who retreats to third after touching home because she left to early, are you negating the run? If so, using what rule? If not, what are you doing with the runner on third? And does it matter if the player retreating to third does so in error.
________
WASHINGTON MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES

[kfo9494]

I tend to agree with Andy but the wording in the case book is making it a hard sell.
>
then---
If the runner that was on third touches home then the coach calls her back to the base with no throw by the defense-- I hope the car is started when you pull the runner off third and add a point to the offensive team.

[Dakota]

A point?

[Andy]

Originally Posted by kfo9494

I tend to agree with Andy but the wording in the case book is making it a hard sell.
>
then---
If the runner that was on third touches home then the coach calls her back to the base with no throw by the defense-- I hope the car is started when you pull the runner off third and add a point to the offensive team.

Maybe so, but if the runner has legally scored per 9-9-1 (NFHS) and her continued running did not cause interference, you would be correct in pulling her off of third and scoring a run.

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by youngump

There's nothing UFO-like about my scenario. If you have a runner who retreats to third after touching home because she left to early, are you negating the run? If so, using what rule? If not, what are you doing with the runner on third? And does it matter if the player retreating to third does so in error.

RS #1 pretty well lays it all out if you are having trouble with appeal plays. Let me know which part is confusing you.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

RS #1 pretty well lays it all out if you are having trouble with appeal plays. Let me know which part is confusing you.

There's no appeal in the scenario I'm presenting. Just a runner who a) was (or b) mistakenly believed she was) subject to appeal retreating to third and arriving safely before the defense could consider appealing.
________
YOUNGSWEETPUSSY4U

[Dakota]

In a) the runner did not score, since she left early / missed 3B, etc. IOW, a baserunning infraction leaves her (and her score) in jeopardy. Since she rectified the basrunning error, she now has to proceed home again to score. The alternate way for her to score here is to not return to 3B and hope the defense does not appeal.

In b) it is just a bit of post-scoring harmless exercise.

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by youngump

There's no appeal in the scenario I'm presenting. Just a runner who a) was (or b) mistakenly believed she was) subject to appeal retreating to third and arriving safely before the defense could consider appealing.

I admit I was having trouble interpreting what you meant before; given what you just stated, Dakota's post should clear it up. My original answer to you "From my point of view, you are making the mistake of complicating this. Either its an appeal play, which is covered by rule, or a score, which is covered by rule."

Is still the same. The answer has been stated pretty clearly by different people in different ways under different rule sets in this thread so hopefully its all clear now.

[Andy]

Originally Posted by youngump

There's nothing UFO-like about my scenario. If you have a runner who retreats to third after touching home because she left to early, are you negating the run? If so, using what rule? If not, what are you doing with the runner on third? And does it matter if the player retreating to third does so in error.

9-9-1 (NFHS) defines how a run legally scores. Touching first, second, third, and home. In the original scenario, this is exactly what happened. That run has legally scored and cannot be "unscored".

In your scenario above, the runner has not legally scored (yet) since she left third early on a caught fly ball. As Mike said earlier, a runner is always allowed to retreat to correct a baserunning mistake. The runner is subject to appeal up until the next pitch to a batter or the end of the inning. If no appeal is made, the run legally scores when the time for the appeal has passed.