Missed 1B - double 1B appeal?

[WestMichiganBlue]

Batted ball to F6, B-R dives in to 1B, touching the white bag with his hand, beating the throw.

While still laying on the ground and touching the base, the B-R is tagged by F3 who appeals for a missed base. B-R still has not touched the colored bag, but - OTOH - the appeal has to be made before the B-R returns to the bag.

So is he out - touching the white base is no different than being off the base returning from RF?

Or safe because it is too late to appeal?

WMB

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by WestMichiganBlue

Batted ball to F6, B-R dives in to 1B, touching the white bag with his hand, beating the throw.

While still laying on the ground and touching the base, the B-R is tagged by F3 who appeals for a missed base. B-R still has not touched the colored bag, but - OTOH - the appeal has to be made before the B-R returns to the bag.

So is he out - touching the white base is no different than being off the base returning from RF?

Or safe because it is too late to appeal?

WMB

What idiot dives into 1B with a double-bag and not avoiding a tag? That alone may be cause to ring him up.

The BR never left the base, so he cannot "return", failed to touch the appropriate base when a play was obviously being executed at 1B and never "passed" the base to allow 8.3.B into consideration.

Granted, the umpire would really have to be on top of this play to see the hand touching the wrong base, but for the scenario offered, I'll honor the appeal.

[argodad]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

What idiot dives into 1B with a double-bag and not avoiding a tag? That alone may be cause to ring him up.

If we could call outs based on stupidity games would be a lot shorter.

[Dakota]

Wasn't this, or a play very much like it, discussed here a year or so ago? As I recall, the discussion divided on two points:

1) Safe, because you cannot honor an appeal for missing a base that the runner is touching at the time of the appeal, and after the BR reaches 1B (whether missed or not), the base becomes one big bag;

2) Out, because the runner did not "return" to the double base since the runner never left the base.

I think I lean toward #1.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

...The BR never left the base, so he cannot "return", failed to touch the appropriate base when a play was obviously being executed at 1B and never "passed" the base to allow 8.3.B into consideration...

Does passage of time matter? In the OP, the appeal appears to have been made nearly immediately. What if the BR has time to stand, dust off, but still has not lost contact with the white bag or touched the orange. At that point, someone throws the ball to F3, who tags the BR voicing the appeal. Still honor the appeal?

[CecilOne]

Isn't the concept of "passed a base" a way of saying the runner does not have to touch the base as long as s/he covers the distance to the base and at some point is in the air space of the base?

Is "passed a base" synonymous with "reached a base"?

If those are true, does it matter whether the hand or foot is on the top of the base ("passed" the leading edge) or just touching the side of the base?

The wording of returning to a base possibly is because, like a lot of other rules, based on a specific visualization or case; with the principle applying more broadly.

So, if the returning to a base principle really means having contact with the base after "passing/reaching"; then we should consider that the OP runner is safe from appeal. Also, we have to look at rules that were written before double bags were added in that light, IOW what did it mean when we only had a single bag.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

Isn't the concept of "passed a base" a way of saying the runner does not have to touch the base as long as s/he covers the distance to the base and at some point is in the air space of the base?

Is "passed a base" synonymous with "reached a base"?

If those are true, does it matter whether the hand or foot is on the top of the base ("passed" the leading edge) or just touching the side of the base?

The wording of returning to a base possibly is because, like a lot of other rules, based on a specific visualization or case; with the principle applying more broadly.

So, if the returning to a base principle really means having contact with the base after "passing/reaching"; then we should consider that the OP runner is safe from appeal. Also, we have to look at rules that were written before double bags were added in that light, IOW what did it mean when we only had a single bag.

No, to all of the above. It specifically states "passes", not reached, not attained, not do cartwheels to. The context of the sentence is for consideration as the various rules apply to the runner touching bases in legal order, base awards and the scoring of runs.

Argue if you must, but you will lose the protest if you apply it in any contradictory manner.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Does passage of time matter? In the OP, the appeal appears to have been made nearly immediately. What if the BR has time to stand, dust off, but still has not lost contact with the white bag or touched the orange. At that point, someone throws the ball to F3, who tags the BR voicing the appeal. Still honor the appeal?

That is another scenario which has no bearing on my original response.

[Tex]

Safe, can't call a runner out for missing the base they are standing on.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

That is another scenario which has no bearing on my original response.

I know, hence, my question.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

No, to all of the above. It specifically states "passes", not reached, not attained, not do cartwheels to. The context of the sentence is for consideration as the various rules apply to the runner touching bases in legal order, base awards and the scoring of runs.

Argue if you must, but you will lose the protest if you apply it in any contradictory manner.

Thank you.

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by Tex

Safe, can't call a runner out for missing the base they are standing on.

By saying "safe", aren't you now making it legal for a batter-runner to run directly to the white base on every initial play at first? That seems a contradiction of the rule and counerproductive to the intent of the double first base.

I would have an out on this play.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Tex

Safe, can't call a runner out for missing the base they are standing on.

Reading just a little bit into the scenario"

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Does passage of time matter? In the OP, the appeal appears to have been made nearly immediately. What if the BR has time to stand, dust off, but still has not lost contact with the white bag or touched the orange. At that point, someone throws the ball to F3, who tags the BR voicing the appeal. Still honor the appeal?

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

That is another scenario which has no bearing on my original response.

Originally Posted by Dakota

I know, hence, my question.

Hello... well, does it?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Hello... well, does it?

And I thought I didn't have a life

It could. It depends on what you are talking about. You changed the scenario to the ball being in someone else's hands.

In SP, the PU should have declared "time" if there is no immediate action by the defense to make an appeal. Once the ball is dead and the runner is standing on the base, no appeal is available.

In FP, where you people insist on have a "live ball" game (which it really isn't), the appeal would have to be in a expeditious manner or I'm moving on with the game.