Watching 10U - BR to 3rd!

[MD Longhorn]

To the previous answers I'll ask...

When does the LBR begin taking affect after a batter becomes a batter-runner?
What does the leaving early rule say?

At the point of this "what would you do", there had been no appeal, or even a mention by the DC about missing bases or anything of the sort (and all his jawing was during TO anyway).

Yeah, he shouldn't have granted time - we still have a live ball here. I wouldn't have granted time for several seconds after he did... but assume he eventually HAD to, as nothing was happening.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

To the previous answers I'll ask...

When does the LBR begin taking affect after a batter becomes a batter-runner?
What does the leaving early rule say?

At the point of this "what would you do", there had been no appeal, or even a mention by the DC about missing bases or anything of the sort (and all his jawing was during TO anyway).

Yeah, he shouldn't have granted time - we still have a live ball here. I wouldn't have granted time for several seconds after he did... but assume he eventually HAD to, as nothing was happening.

Why not grant time? You didn't have any action and you didn't have any runners off base. Is this situation somehow much different if she runs 30 feet toward first and then takes off for third?
________
ROLL BLUNTS

[SRW]

ASA 8.3.D. Dead ball, runner's out.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by SRW

ASA 8.3.D. Dead ball, runner's out.

No book here at work ... which rule is that?

[youngump]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

No book here at work ... which rule is that?

Running the bases in reverse order.
________
ECIG FORUM

[MD Longhorn]

I don't believe this can be considered creating a travesty of the game by running the bases in backward order, if you've not achieved home plate legally, then traversing toward third is not running the basepaths backward.

I think the most defensible positions are A) BR made it to third missing (grossly) 1st and 2nd base, and B) BR is simply "no where" - has not achieved 1st base and that's all.

Once time was called, if you go with A, then BR would be out if appealled, and additionally would be out once the pitcher held the ball, if she tried to go ahead and head toward first base (LBR).

If you go with B, the LBR can NEVER come into play - BR has not reached first base ... so LBR is not in effect. Umpire called time, with BR not on a base and no play being made - the only acceptable remedy there is simply placing the runner on 1st.

PU in this situation, on the spot and without the benefit of 4000 internet umpires to help... ... simply told the DC that the runner is on third, and we need to play on. Defense never did appeal the play. Once the next pitch happened, amid all the grumbling directed at me solely because I wore a similar shirt to the umpire in question (!), I told them all they had to do was appeal that she missed 1st or 2nd.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I don't believe this can be considered creating a travesty of the game by running the bases in backward order, if you've not achieved home plate legally, then traversing toward third is not running the basepaths backward.

I agree with your conclusion, but not how you got there. This is definitely running the bases backward, she went to the last numbered base first and if it had been a double, she would have run to second. But the rule says that she has to be running them backward to confuse the defense or make a travesty of the game and I think it's pretty clear she did it because she was confused.
________
Washington Medical Marijuana Dispensary

[celebur]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I think the most defensible positions are A) BR made it to third missing (grossly) 1st and 2nd base, and B) BR is simply "no where" - has not achieved 1st base and that's all.

Once time was called, if you go with A, then BR would be out if appealled, and additionally would be out once the pitcher held the ball, if she tried to go ahead and head toward first base (LBR).

I would agree with this, and I'm not sure which one is the better option.

Since the PU went with A, then:

Most of the DC's argument was of the form "She can't do that." and "That's just wrong" --- never any concrete anything.

Given the context, I think I would interpret this as a valid appeal. The DC coach is saying that the BR can't go to 3B without first going to 1B (and 2B) thus implying that she missed those bases.