Routine Situation and Odd Ruling

[greymule]

I read the original post 10 times before I realized that this:

"who is close enough to R1 to tag him while he's still standing on the bag"

means this:

"who tags R1 while R1 is standing on 2B"

I initially read the former to mean that F6 was close enough to R1 to tag him but for some reason did not apply the tag, and I was wondering why that fact was relevant beyond simply depicting the play.

I see the same two outs that everybody has cited. I know that U-trip has had some "outlier" rules, like awarding only 2B to a runner who is returning to 1B when the ball is thrown into DBT, but I can't imagine that a forced runner enjoys some sort of immunity from a tag until he leaves his original base.

Originally Posted by greymule

I read the original post 10 times before I realized that this:

"who is close enough to R1 to tag him while he's still standing on the bag"

means this:

"who tags R1 while R1 is standing on 2B"

I initially read the former to mean that F6 was close enough to R1 to tag him but for some reason did not apply the tag, and I was wondering why that fact was relevant beyond simply depicting the play.

I see the same two outs that everybody has cited. I know that U-trip has had some "outlier" rules, like awarding only 2B to a runner who is returning to 1B when the ball is thrown into DBT, but I can't imagine that a forced runner enjoys some sort of immunity from a tag until he leaves his original base.

Sorry about my original post in red...your quote is better and what I meant.

What you stated in blue is not correct anymore, since they've gone to two bases from where they were at the time of the hit no matter if they were going back or not.

[CelticNHBlue]

I am going to guess three outs in this sit. By tagging the base at first get the BR, the fielder held the ball while contacting the bag that is also contacting the runner on first; electricity gets you the third out.