Ending Game
 

Illini Ref posted a similar situation for baseball and I am wondering about NFHS Softball:

Bases loaded, two out, bottom of the last inning, tie game. NFHS rule set only please.

Batter draws a walk and touches first. Runner at third touches home. Runner from first base never touches second and runs to join the celebration. Before the umpires leave the field of play, the defensive team appeals that the runner from first base never touched second. Does the run score?

Please provide NFHS Softball rule reference if possible.

Rule 8 Batter-Runner and Runner
SECTION 6 THE RUNNER IS OUT
ART. 22 . . . She abandons a base, enters her team area or leaves the field of play.

Rule 9 Scoring and Record Keeping
SECTION 1 HOW A TEAM SCORES
ART. 1 . . .
EXCEPTION: A run is not scored if the runner advances to home plate during action in which the third out is made as follows:
d. when a third out is declared on an appeal play resulting in a force out (This play takes precedence if enforcing of it would negate a score.);

8-6-22 is not an appeal play.

Are you saying you're gonna automatically make that call without being asked by the defense?

I would in a non-walk-off situation, so why is the walk-off situation different? I've read a number of umpires SAY this needs to be appealed by the defense, but where is the rule backing that up? The runner did not miss the base; she failed to advance.

If the run would be disallowed if the defense appealed, why would not the run be disallowed without the appeal?

Not a disagreement with your original interpretation, but to this question, lots of things are accepted/ignored if not appealed.

Wouldn't you need to achieve a base to abandon a base? She did not abandon 1st base, she never reached 2nd base. This is either a live ball out or missed base appeal.

Ask yourself this then... on a walk, can the defense get a force out by throwing to 2nd? No. So this can't be a live ball out. And you can't have a missed base unless they achieved the base as well.

The ONLY out available here is abandonment, which does not qualify for disallowing R1's run (again, assuming we're talking 2nd or 3rd base here).

I had to run out to the car to get the case book. Just read the NFHS Case book, Page 64. Based on the two case plays the runner MAY be called out. We had a abandoned base situation in So-cal this year. BR hit a shot to the left of F5. F5 does not catch the ball. BR thinks she does and after reaching 1st walks off the base towards her dugout. BU calls time and places her back on 1st. DC protest because she walked off the base after F1 had the ball in the circle. CIF upheld the umpires decision. Therefore if this play happened in California the umpire could call time and place the runner on 2nd to end the game based on rule 8-6-22

Neither case ruling on 8-6-22 talks about abandoning "a base". The first says the runner is out for "giving up" and the second says the runner is out for "abandoning her effort to run the bases." (Case plays 8.6.22 A and B). In this situation, runner is "abandoning her effort to run the bases".

Since the BOB is a base award to all of the runners, I'm not 100% convinced R3's failure to advance would disallow the run anyway. This is not a force, because the runner is not in jeopardy. What, then, would be the basis for disallowing the run even if you called R3 out?

Nothing. ASA has taught for years that only BR and R1 are relevant in this situation, regarding whether the run scores or not.

Don't know what clinics you've been attending, but I've never heard such a thing.

Multiple. The first time I heard this was probably 12 years ago or so - I only remember that time because it got an "Oh really?" from me. I know I've heard this numerous times since then.

Based on your comment though, you are telling me this is wrong. If so, what rule? Clinics aside, I can find no rules basis for disallowing a run in this case.

So, what do you do when R3 goes directly to the dugout and F4 is standing on 2B with the ball appealing the missed base?

How can it be a missed base - to miss a base, you have to pass it without hitting it. If you are calling this a missed base in THIS case, are you implying that you would not call the out for abandoning the basepaths if this happened in the middle of the game when R1's run didn't appear to end the game? No - BU would rule that runner out for ABANDONMENT (Yes, it's usually a crutch, but for once it's the proper ruling) when they entered the dugout. You can't call it abandonment in one case, but insist on an appeal for a missed base in another.

I ask again ... by what rule are you disallowing this run?

It wasn't a missed base; it was failure to advance. So, call the runner out for failure to advance. Now, find the rule that removes the run from the board.

Note: This is speaking ASA based on comment about what ASA teaches.

Citations please. But for the sake of argument, say the player was already heading that way and just ran passed on the way to the 3B dugout. Is there also a rule which dictates how close a runner must come to this base for it to be missed? :rolleyes: Think about that statement. If a runner goes directly from 3B to 1B on a caught fly ball, are you not allowing the appeal at 2B because the runner did not physically pass the base?

I didn't state that I insisted on an appeal, did I?

My question was based on your statement that ASA teaches that only the BR and scoring runner is the concern. I've never heard such a thing. The importance of the scoring runner is obvious. But why wouldn't all other runners carry the same importance whether BR, R2 or R3?

Where did I state that I was?

How do you know it wasn't a missed base? Cite the definition of a "missed base". And please cite the rule where it states a runner is out for failing to advance?

If necessary, I will ;)

So, playing word games, are we? Since this has morphed into an ASA discussion, I guess rule 8-7U is superfluous, and such infractions must be appealed?

Fine whatever. Honor the appeal, now...

... go ahead.

Too much semantics, doublespeak and answering a question with a question. But my answer to THIS question is because the rules SPECIFICALLY disallow a run if BR is called out for the 3rd out before reaching first base. They do not say this regarding R2 or R3.

A lot of us here consider that when you post something, that's it - it's the answer. So answer us here.

How, exactly, are you taking this run off the board? By what rule.

And if your answer is that you're claiming R3 "missed" 2nd base, are you saying you would not call this runner out without an appeal if she ran off the field during a situation that did not end the game?

I would point out that the OP is an NFHS situation, and it has now come to also include ASA. NFHS does not require a runner who abandons her advance to actually enter DBT for the out; they require that the runner "abandons a base" OR "leaves the field of play". ASA uses AND instead of OR. NFHS has two case plays on abandoning a base. As I said earlier in this thread, in one case play the runner is out for "giving up" (quoting the ruling) and in the other the runner is out for "abandoning her effort to run the bases" (again, quoting the ruling).

But, as I also said, fine, rule her out on appeal. Where does the support come from to remove the run from the board? It was not the BR and it was not a force play. It was a base award.

Not to take the other side, because I CLEARLY don't think this is a missed base appeal...

But a runner who is FORCED to leave first base due to the batter becoming a batter-runner is considered a forced base, even if it's an award. If someone makes a missed base appeal (a real one) on this runner on the base they are forced to go to, it WOULD nullify the run. Don't have the book in front of me, but if memory serves, this is in the same sentence that says "or a batter-runner before she reaches first base" in nullifying a run.

You accuse me of word games, but I've yet to see a response to my questions?

I made no such statement and it is too late in the year for you to blame it on the cold weather.

Wow...

Three years ago when I was posting here all the time, you (and Atl Steve) were generally the guys who would give the definitive right answers when we really had a sticky one.

Now (and not just on this thread), it seems all you do is badger and dodge. If we're wrong on this situation, PLEASE tell us why. But this constant answering a question with a question and saying "I didn't say that" without clarifying where you were misunderstood is completely unhelpful. Most of us are here to learn, to share, and help each other (and badger the coaches and players of course ... and talk about beer!). I'm not sure what happened in the past 3 years, but the additions from you in the last 4 or 5 threads (well ... other than the beer one) have not helped any of us.

Sorry if I offended ... but I miss the helpful Mike.

Yet, you've avoided answering the key question of this thread (as opposed to semantic questionis). Is the run voided? If so, by what rule?

+1

Forced to advance, but there is no force out available at 2B. It is an awarded base, as NFHS Case Play 9.1.1-D makes clear, "RULING: The run scores; R1 was awarded home as soon as ball four was declared. (8-4-3a Effect; 9-1-1 Exception b)."

Did anyone actually bother reading the words I typed? It certainly doesn’t seem like it.

I did not respond to the NFHS question because it was an NFHS question and I’m long past the HS season and haven’t had time to check the book.
Comments were made concerning ASA and that is to what I responded.

ASA has taught for years that only BR and R1 are relevant in this situation, regarding whether the run scores or not.<O:p</O:p
<O:p</O:p
My question was why only those two?


How can it be a missed base - to miss a base, you have to pass it without hitting it.
</O:p
Simply asked for citation of this using the example of a runner crossing the diamond going nowhere near 2B

It wasn't a missed base; it was failure to advance. So, call the runner out for failure to advance. Now, find the rule that removes the run from the board.
<O:p</O:p
And once again, I asked for citation to which Tom responded:

So, playing word games, are we? Since this has morphed into an ASA discussion, I guess rule 8-7U is superfluous, and such infractions must be appealed?

I don’t know what “word” games to which you are referring. As I normally do, I cited the statements to which I am responding, but you seem to keep going back to the OP.

I don't know WHY ... I didn't write the book. There is a rule that states a run can't score if an appeal on THAT RUNNER is successfully made for an out. That takes care of R1. There is a rule that states a run cannot score if the 3rd out is made on the BR before the BR reaches first - that takes care of BR. There are no such rules that apply to R2 or R3 in this situation that would nullify a run. WHY? Heck if I know.


I am not positive the term missed base is defined in the book, although I don't have it in front of me. However, in practice, missed base has to mean that you actually missed a base. You can't be called out for missing a base that you never tried to get to, can you? It's not missing a base. Regarding your example, I suppose one could make the argument both ways --- I suspect that very few would consider a runner running from first base directly to the dugout as "missing" 2nd base (or 3rd base for that matter). I can see a more interesting argument regarding R2 running past 3rd base on their way to the dugout... and honestly I'm not sure that's defined as one or the other either.

All I've asked of you is what rule you would site in order to disallow this run. Still have no answer there. I've answered yours.

My responses up to that point were NFHS (as the OP requested), which words the abandonment rule slightly differently, hence, in the context of NFHS, word games.

However, since you want to talk only ASA, instead of counting angels on the head of a pin (missed base appeal, ruled out for abandonment), lets just assume R1 is ruled out for either of those - take your pick - where is the ASA rule, ruling, case play, or clinic notes that say you take the run off the board in the OP situation (BOB with bases loaded and 2 outs, walk-off situation)? You said you would cite the rule "if necessary." Well?

I have had to tip toe around the p**ing contest but this is what I've found so someone tell me is this correct or is there something else I am missing.

Dakota’s post is not quite the question that was posted. In Dakota’s post the runner made 2B and was tagged while off base. On page 70 in the NFHS case book 9.9.1 M.

In the last of the 7th. Inning, two outs. Score tied, bases loaded. B6 walks to force R1 home. B6 assumes the game is over fails to go to 1B and leaves the field. The ball is held at 1B. Ruling: B6 is out and the run does not score. (Rule 8.6.7 Exception b)

So B6 is out, run is nullified after the appeal?

Yes - no run... but this is not the OP either. there is a separate specific rule telling us that a run can't score on a play where BR is put out before reaching first base for the third out... that is the rule that applies to your sitch.

The disagreement between Tom, Mike, and I is whether there is any rule that says that if R2 or R3 neglect to make it to the next base, the run is nullified. I don't believe there is - neither does Tom. Mike has alluded that there is, and is generally right - but he has not helped us find that rule.

I'm reading Rule 8.6.7 which in part says the batter-runner at 1B or any other runner forced because of the batter-runner. This is a force out.

Read the whole rule (or post it). There is no force on R2 or R3. Can you throw the ball to 2nd or 3rd before they get there to get them out? No.

Part of that rule DOES say an appeal for a missed base on R2 or R3, if that base was a forced base, can nullify a run. ASA is similar but not identical. But therein lies the crux of the disagreement.

The runner is forced to advance, but it is not a force out since it is an awarded base. There is not force out situation at 2B in the OP situation. I can't see any rule that takes a run off the board due to a missed base appeal on an awarded base, or for an out due to abandoning an awarded base, on other than the BR or the runner who actually scored.

You may be correct but I'm being devil's advocate. In the case book 1B is also an awarded base that was failed be touched. would 2nd or 3rd be treated any differentially?

Aren't you glad we don't hear appeals as a group? :eek:

Of course, then there would be specific rule, a little easier. :rolleyes:

We could all get together and vote

That is the crux of the discussion. Speaking NFHS, show me where R1 in the OP situation being ruled out negates the run:

NFHS 9-1-1

I would say B and D

It is not a force out; it is a base award. At best, the runner is out for missing a base on an awarded base, but it is not a force out.

Going back to the case book. 1B is an awarded base as well. BR is called out on appeal and no run scores. So why would 2nd and 3rd base be treated any differently?

Because they are not specifically mentioned in the rules and BR is, even if base-on-balls was not the intent.

Yes... the difference is this: "by the batter-runner before touching first base"

Well I will keep checking back until we can get a definitive answer. This happens a lot during Rec season. There are run limits per inning and often on walks not all the runners touch the next base. We treat it as an appeal. Most of the time the coaches don't even notice.

"It is not a force out; it is a base award. At best, the runner is out for missing a base on an awarded base, but it is not a force out."

But it is a base to which the runner is forced, regardless of whether it is an award. Isn't this a similar play:

Bases loaded, two outs, B4 hits a grand-slam over the fence. R3, who started on 1B, misses 2B. After everyone has crossed the plate, defensive fielder appeals that R3 missed 2B. How many runs score? None, because the runner missed the base to which they were "forced." All of the runners were "awarded" home on the ball hit out of play on the homerun.

So how is the OP any different? Are you saying that because I can't throw the ball to 2B to retire R3, and it is an awarded base, it is not possible to have a "force" on an appeal?

Again, go back and read all the words typed. I did not introduce ASA into the discussion.

Rule 1.Force out
Rule 8.3.I
Rule 8.7.G
Rule 5.5.B.1
UIC Clinic Guide Definitions - !.Appeals.I

Okay. Can we all agree that a force play exists because of the BOB?

If R1 abandons their effort to run, can we agree this does not negate the force play? The force is still in effect. Note that the definition of a Force Play does not require that an out can be made at the base to which the runner is forced, just that the batter became a BR.

The batter, by rule, has indeed become a batter-runner.

She failed to touch the base. It's an appeal play. It's a force out. It's the 3rd out. No runs can score. That seems pretty plain to me.

You've defined the crux of the argument...

"The runner fails to touch the intervening base or bases ". Intervening means BETWEEN. This rule is meant to allow the defense to appeal an out for a runner MISSING a base. The situation described is NOT missing a base. It is abandoning a base. We don't accurately have abandonment often --- but this is EXACTLY what that rule is written for.

If you think there's no difference, consider the same situation but without it being an end-of-game situation.

No outs. Bases loaded. Batter walks and advances. R1 scores. R2 runs off the field to the dugout. Do you stand around waiting for an appeal, or do you call this runner out? You call her out. If this was a missed base, or there was not a difference between abandoning a base and missing one, then you would have to wait for an appeal. But you don't. She's out right now, without appeal. She abandoned 3rd base.

Similarly, in the OP - the runner from 1st or 2nd, technically (although we often don't bother because it's irrelevant) these runners are out as soon as they leave the field. Appealing for missing a base is irrelevant - they are already out --- and their out was NOT the result of a missed base appeal, which is the rule you're using to say the run should be nullified. No such run nullification clause exists with the abandonment rule.

Page 70 of the 2010 NFHS case book 9-9-1 Situation I:
R1 is on third and R2 is on first with two outs. When B5 receives ball four. An overthrow at third permits R1 to reach home. In advancing (a) R2 fails to touch second or (b) B5 goes to second base but fails to touch first base.

Ruling: If the defense properly appeals. the umpire will declare in (a) R2 out for missing second base. and in (b) B5 out for missing first base. In either case the run by R1 will not count since the third out of the inning was the result of a force play (8-6-7 Penalty, 9-191 Exception d, 2-1)

Not sure why you posted this - it's a completely different scenario in that the runner MISSES a base on his way somewhere else. As stated numerous times, missing a base and abandonment are two different things.

I would like to know why you have decided you can't abandon a base you never occupied. Read that rule again (post if you like) - it specifically says abandons his attempt to advance or something like that - you don't have to abandon a specific base, nor does it mention whether you can or can't abandon a base you never occupied.

Besides - NFHS has a clear caseplay EXACTLY like the OP in which the outs on R2 or R3 DO NOT nullify the run. The discussion has evolved into an ASA question because ASA does not have that caseplay. The rules, however, end up being the same.

Mike:

I understand what you're saying. Part of the problem is I read the rule differently than you did. I read it as "fails to touch the intervening base" OR "fails to touch the bases or bases in regular or reverse order". I guess in my mind I was putting a comma where it didn't belong.

Another part of the problem is "abandoning" a base is not defined. Usually in a walk-off situation, the celebration happens on the field of play. Since R1 didn't leave the field of play, when is an umpire to judge she's abandoned her right to run the bases? We're told that a BR on a dropped-third hasn't abandoned her right to attempt to advance to 1B until she's in the dugout. Does that same thing apply here?

I really do understand where you're coming from.

To turn your argument around, if the defense appeals to you prior to you having an opportunity to call her out for abandoning, would you allow the appeal? Or, are you saying there's nothing to appeal because a base hasn't been "missed"? (I think I know your answer.) ;-)

Sorry, after reading your post I understand where you are coming from. I still don't completely agree, but I see you point. I removed the quote you were referring too. :o

Yes

There's nothing to appeal unless the BR went past the supposedly missed base. If we have abandonment, we have it when it happens, no appeal necessary.

I disagree. This IS a force play because the runner is forced to advance because of the batter becoming a batter-runner. Agreed, there's no option for a force OUT, but this is by definintion a FORCE PLAY.

Then ... at what point do we judge she's abandoned? If the celebration takes place on the playing field and she never enters the team area or leaves the field ... at what moment has she abandoned??

Ah... misunderstood the question. I would say that there is a reason "abandonment" is not precisely defined. I think the umpire would be the sole judge of when THIS runner has abandoned her efforts to run the bases, and would personally make that decision when she's joining the celebration and clearly no longer trying to advance. And again ... if we're talking about anyone but BR or R1 - it doesn't really matter as long as you don't have a quick trigger finger on it and somehow have R2 or R3 abandoning before R1 scores.

Thanks, Mike. This has certainly been an interesting thread.

Really? Mike (Irish) didn't like my use of the phrase "abandoning her effort to advance", but it is appropriate for NFHS.

Originally Posted by softball_junky View Post
"The runner didn't abandon the base, the runner never touched the base. You can't abandon a base you never occupied."

After reading mbcrowder post I removed this statement. I realized it didn't apply :o

The only two plays in the casebook on abandoning a base the runner made the base they were attempting and only one of them where the runner left the field. There is not one I can find where the runner is forced to the next base and never touching it.

In 8-4-2: A runner forfeits exemption from liability and may be put out when the ball is in play or on awarded bases, the runner fails to touch a base before attempting to make the next base.

This doesn't cover the issue either.