Touching bases in legal order

[Centerfield9]

R1 at 1st. Batter hits a triple, touches 1st and 2nd and stands on 3rd. R1 misses 2nd, touches 3rd, and slides into home on a play where the ball goes out-of-play. The defense is screaming that R1 missed 2nd and to appeal. R1 gets up and runs back to 3rd on his way to 2nd.

Questions:
Can R1 go back in reverse order to touch a missed base on a dead ball? And how does this affect the appeal?
Does the batter-runner need to back-track behind R1, i.e. go back to 1st, so that R1 can occupy 2nd?

[RKBUmp]

Dont have an ASA case study so cant find it there. The NFHS case study book doesnt have anything in it that even comes close, but by the letter of the ASA rules it appears that the runner/s have to be allowed to complete their base running requirments before an appeal may be granted.

No mention is made about succeeding runner except to state that a runner may not return to touch a missed base or base left to soon once a succeeding runner has scored. In the case presented, the succeeding runner has not scored so it appears that if the runner at 3rd property retreats back to 1st and lead runner properly goes back to 2nd it would be a legal play.

Anyone have an ASA case study that covers it?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Centerfield9

R1 at 1st. Batter hits a triple, touches 1st and 2nd and stands on 3rd. R1 misses 2nd, touches 3rd, and slides into home on a play where the ball goes out-of-play. The defensive is screaming that R1 missed 2nd and to appeal. R1 gets up and runs back to 3rd on his way to 2nd.

Questions:
Can R1 go back in reverse order to touch a missed base on a dead ball?

Yes.

And how does this affect the appeal?

It has no affect on the appeal which will be accepted by the umpire AFTER all baserunning duties are completed. Of course, by then there is no appeal to be made since the runner touched all the bases.

Does the batter-runner need to back-track behind R1, i.e. go back to 1st, so that R1 can occupy 2nd?

Though I have never seen it, yes.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Though I have never seen it, yes.

Why?
________
Sweetboyscouplexx Live

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by youngump

Why?

Why not?

[RKBUmp]

Because the batter/runner can not pass any other runner on base without being out. There is no way for the lead runner to legally retouch 2nd base without the batter/runner also returning to 1st legally.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by RKBUmp

Because the batter/runner can not pass any other runner on base without being out. There is no way for the lead runner to legally retouch 2nd base without the batter/runner also returning to 1st legally.

Actually, yes there is. It is legally possible for B2 to retreat only to 2nd, and R1 retreat (also) to 2nd, touch it with B2 also in simultaneous contact, as long as there is no physical passing.

In live play, that couldn't be the end, but, we are talking about awarded bases due to the ball thrown out of play. They only need to retreat enough to retouch, then advance again to the legally awarded bases, again in proper order.

[Tru_in_Blu]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

Actually, yes there is. It is legally possible for B2 to retreat only to 2nd, and R1 retreat (also) to 2nd, touch it with B2 also in simultaneous contact, as long as there is no physical passing.

In live play, that couldn't be the end, but, we are talking about awarded bases due to the ball thrown out of play. They only need to retreat enough to retouch, then advance again to the legally awarded bases, again in proper order.

So this could get pretty interesting. If the batter did not retreat to 2B as described above, as soon as the runner went from home to 3B, then passed B2 on her way to touch 2b, B2 would be called out? [And if called out immediately as the third out of the inning, this would render the runner's retrace of the bases moot?]

Ted

[youngump]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Why not?

Because the rule for passing a runner is only intended to apply during a live ball. (At least based on the penalty.)
________
1CherryLady

[Centerfield9]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

So this could get pretty interesting. If the batter did not retreat to 2B as described above, as soon as the runner went from home to 3B, then passed B2 on her way to touch 2b, B2 would be called out? [And if called out immediately as the third out of the inning, this would render the runner's retrace of the bases moot?]

Ted

Good question. On a live ball, I would agree. But does this apply on a dead ball? If the runners are allowed to finish their base running responsibilities, as long as they touch the bases in correct order, does it matter if they pass other runners?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by youngump

Because the rule for passing a runner is only intended to apply during a live ball. (At least based on the penalty.)

Citation please.

Speaking ASA

While the "ball remains" or "is live" subsequent to the rule being effected, I cannot find any published stipulation that the rule only applies to live-ball situations.

Now I think about it, I believe this was covered at the UIC Clinic this year using a MLB example from before they called it MLB. I believe the example used involved Tim McCarver hitting an over-the-fence grand slam on July 4, 1976 in Pittsburgh. Rounding 1B, he promptly passed Gary Maddox who was admiring the shot. Mr. All Talk, No Rules Knowledge was ruled out, credited with a single and three RBIs.

[Tru_in_Blu]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I believe the example used involved Tim McCarver hitting an over-the-fence grand slam on July 4, 1976 in Pittsburgh. Rounding 1B, he promptly passed Gary Maddox who was admiring the shot. Mr. All Talk, No Rules Knowledge was ruled out, credited with a single and three RBIs.

This has happened a few times. I recall Dalton Jones of the Red Sox doing the same thing and passed the runner at first base who was looking at the ball. Might have been against Detroit.

Then in a playoff game more recently, someone for the Mets hit a "grand slam single", w/ 3 rbi. I believe that one was a walk-off affair, and the extra run(s) didn't matter. Still, you'd think the player would like to "touch 'em all".

Ted

[SethPDX]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

Then in a playoff game more recently, someone for the Mets hit a "grand slam single", w/ 3 rbi. I believe that one was a walk-off affair, and the extra run(s) didn't matter. Still, you'd think the player would like to "touch 'em all".

I remember this. It was a walk-off in the 99 NLCS. He did touch first, and was trying to run the bases, but he got jumped by his teammates who came out of the dugout. The scoring decision: Single and 3 RBI for the batter. It was a HR, so the runners were entitled to advance to home, which they all did.

[AtlUmpSteve]

I see these examples as a pattern, a precedent; whether live or dead, whether bases touched in jeopardy or awarded, baserunning rules (touch bases, in legal order, no passing, no assistance by other than other runners not passing) must be honored, or violations are subject to penalty (if appealed when necessary). What runners must do in live ball play (reverse to allow a preceding runner to return without passing) must also apply when allowing a runner to "complete baserunning responsibilities". B2 MUST allow R1 to reverse without passing; yes, B2 would the runner ruled out.

The place I start to lose my definitive clarity is if/when an umpire should call any non-appealed baserunning violation during a dead ball, like passing the other runner while backtracking. Still a dead ball, can they still (or re-) fix the running violations? It hasn't happened to me, but I think, absent any definitive interpretation to the contrary (and I don't know of one), that I would react the same as a live ball violation, calling passing and/or assisting, and requiring an appeal if a missed base or out or order).

[Tru_in_Blu]

Originally Posted by SethPDX

I remember this. It was a walk-off in the 99 NLCS. He did touch first, and was trying to run the bases, but he got jumped by his teammates who came out of the dugout. The scoring decision: Single and 3 RBI for the batter. It was a HR, so the runners were entitled to advance to home, which they all did.

I had the Dalton Jones thing wrong. Apparently he was playing for Detroit against the Red Sox. Wikipedia's got it all straight...

Grand Slam Single
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Grand Slam Single is a reference to the hit that ended Game Five of the 1999 National League Championship Series between the New York Mets and the Atlanta Braves. The game was played on October 17, 1999 at Shea Stadium.

The game was tied 2-2 going into the top of the 15th inning, until Mets pitcher Octavio Dotel gave up an RBI triple to Keith Lockhart, giving the Braves a 3-2 lead.

In the bottom of the 15th inning, the Mets loaded the bases against Braves relief pitcher Kevin McGlinchy. Mets catcher Todd Pratt drew a bases loaded walk, tying the score 3-3.

The next batter was Mets third baseman Robin Ventura. Ventura crushed the 2-1 pitch over the wall in right-center for an ostensible grand slam, winning the game for the Mets and driving the Mets players and fans into a frenzied celebration. Ventura, however, never reached second base as Todd Pratt, the runner who was on first, picked up Ventura in celebration. Subsequently, Ventura was mobbed by his teammates, never finishing his trot around the bases. Because he failed to touch all four bases, the hit was officially scored a single. Roger Cedeno, the runner on third at the time, was ruled the only runner to have crossed home plate before the on-field celebration began and the Mets were awarded a 4-3 victory. Thus, Ventura was only credited with a single and one RBI. (It is worth noting that there has never been an actual game-winning grand slam home run in postseason history, as of 2008.)

Sports books in Las Vegas were put into an unusual situation with the "single" as a final score of 7-3 (the score that would have been had Ventura completed his trip around the bases) meant the game would have gone "over" the over/under line, which was 7 1/2. However, the final score actually put the game "under," meaning that many bettors that should have received payouts did not. [1]

The play remains as one of the most memorable moments in Mets postseason history.[citation needed] Orel Hershiser, who played on the 1999 Mets remarked, "It will be right up there with Kirk Gibson's home run, Carlton Fisk, Bucky Dent. This one will be on that tape with them."[citation needed] The Mets went on to lose the series to the Braves, who were in turn swept by the New York Yankees in the World Series.

According to Baseball-Reference.com, there have been at least two other instances of "grand slam singles." Both occurred when a batter hit a grand slam but subsequently passed the runner ahead of them on the base paths, which according to the rules of Major League Baseball causes the runner who passes his teammate to be called out. This happened on July 9, 1970, when Dalton Jones of the Detroit Tigers passed teammate Don Wert in a game against the Boston Red Sox, leaving him with a 3-RBI single. It also occurred on July 4, 1976, when Tim McCarver of the Philadelphia Phillies passed teammate Garry Maddox in a game against the Pittsburgh Pirates, leaving him with a 3-RBI single. In both cases, the other three runs still counted because only the player who passes his teammate is called out. The three baserunners are able to score [2]. Both of these hits took place with less than two outs.