Please provide references to which umpire manuals you quote (ASA, NFHS, CAA) and page numbers. That will help strengthen your argument.

And like Cecil already stated, please type your response after you quote someone, not before.

2010-2011 NFHS umpires manual, p12 re:appeals. just read it. everyone should have one.

Having now read and studied this thread, if faced with the OP, I would give a quick, waist-level safe mechanic, and maybe say "safe". Some response to an apparent appeal is called for, although not required. Sort of like the 'that's-nothing' quick safe mechanic used when a possible interference or obstruction occurs that is neither. I think saying "improper appeal' in this instance would be slightly coaching.

AltUmpSteve got it right in post #14. I am surprised to learn that softball (Fed and ASA, at least) considers this an appeal play. I would have thought it would be a garden-variety tag-off-the-base play (8-6-2), the BR having lost the overrun protection by not returning directly to first base, a la 8-8-9. (Baseball treats it that way for attempts to advance to second after overrunning first; OBR 7.08(j), Fed 8-4-2-p)

For instance, if F3 somehow accidentally tagged BR off the base, I would still have an out. Right?

We all seemed to get caught up in the out call in the OP which is wrong and the confusion about chasing on abandonment and a few tangents to missing the base and the LBR.

Now that I think some more, the action "F3 while holding the ball steps on 1B and appeals that F3 has made an attempt for second" deserves a response. A safe signal and verbal would be appropriate because the fielder is asking for a ruling.

paul, you might be misinterpreting my reply to mike (irish). announcing "improper appeal" is not advisable when the ball is live. but given the scenario, you will most certainly be asked to explain your call when the ball becomes dead or after LBR. you will be asked to explain that the appeal attempt was improper, and a tag on the runner is required.

announcing "ball is live" is unnecessary. but when the live appeal is made, other players, and even coaches may confuse the state of play, and confuse the live appeal for a dead ball appeal. if a subsequent live appeal tag is attempted after the initial appeal call, the umpire might possibly be at the end of blame for any confusion for not clarifying the state of play.

Dave,

The counter argument is, "Mr. Umpire, am I prohibited from attempting to advance? If not, and I have already met the requirement to touch 1B prior to being put out, what is there to appeal? I simply attempted to advance to 2B and changed my mind. Is there a rule prohibiting a runner from changing their mind while someone is holding the ball other than the pitcher within the confines of the circle? Again, Mr. Umpire, what is there to appeal?"

Under the supposition that this may be a legitimate appeal, a runner who rounded 1B toward 2B could be retired simply by throwing the ball to a defender touching 1B and saying, "Mr. Umpire, I am appealing the runner attempting to advance to 2B". I would love to see any umpire rule the out on appeal as the runner is strolling safely into 2B.

You can take all the garbage that has been piled on this, but when it comes down to it, the "appeal" presented in the OP was not a legitimate appeal and there is nothing on which to rule.

Yeah, that is a conundrum I noticed when I first read the play. If you want to tag the runner, you are going to have to go after him/her.

I doubt, though not impossible especially with AA, that the runner is going to say, "oh, you want to tag me? hang on, I'll be right there!" ;)

Extending the premise
 

Does that mean any improperly presented appeal does not get a ruling?

Does that mean any erroneous appeal is ignored?

No, that isn't what I said, was it? However, define what you mean.

Could be, but not necessarily. As the umpire, I'm staying with the live ball and putting myself in the proper position for the most likely play. Again, define erroneous appeal. Do you mean wrong time, wrong base, wrong rule, etc.?

Well, sure, if DHC (defensive head coach) asks for an explanation, I'll call time after relaxed action, and explain anything in as few words as possible.

Knowing the vitality of the ball is the players' responsibility, assisted by their coaches, and is part of the game. Volunteering whether the ball is live is not my job. If you do, then you would be to blame for coaching. Let players make dumb moves.

after your safe call, the smartest player will realize the state of play and make their play. the player that is not as smart and their coach will blame you for their confusion anyways in the aftermath. or imagine this...in the confusion, everyone thinks the ball is already dead including your partner. wouldn't that be ugly. :p

So, those of you who favor giving the safe signal (with no clarifying verbal from the umpire)... how do the players know wtf you are signaling for?

hi tom, I'll bite first, since I'm the troublemaker for you "do nothing" camp guys. ;)

after making sure I knew what was being appealed, I would position myself properly. I would turn to my partner, let's say you, and I would say, "Tom, I have a LIVE appeal for the batter-runner attempting to advance to second". I would indicate at the batter-runner, perhaps w/ both hands. I would then announce "my call is SAFE" and I would give the safe signal.

I'm not implying this way would fix rulebook & umpire manual flaws, but I just can't see any way outa this and not comply w/ our own books. damned if we do, damned if we don't. but doing NOTHING is a plain cop-out.

Well, despite being accused of coaching, I repeat what I opined in post #24 in this thread. One of those is still my response to the "appeal", since no appeal is possible without actually tagging the player.

An "appeal" that doesn't make clear what is being appealed can/should only be answered with a question asking what is being appealed; not a guess about the only legitimate appeal. An appeal that is improperly performed cannot be answered as an appeal; so not safe, nor out; answering the question isn't necessarily coaching, it may be the only possible response to the question posed.

I disagree it is a copout. It seems to me signaling "safe" does not communicate what you are trying to communicate. The problem I have with this is you are, it seems to me, denying the "appeal" - that is, signaling that there was no try for second, when in fact there was. If you signal "safe", it is pretty much impossible short of uttering the words "that is not a proper appeal" or some such to avoid telling the teams (however inadvertently and however much you know it to not be true) that the runner is not in jeopardy if she returns to 1B.

Doing nothing, OTOH, merely leaves the ball live and lets the teams decide what to do next.