Watching 10U - BR to 3rd!

[SRW]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

My, my, my......where does it say the runner must touch those bases in that order?

Rule 8.3 refers to order and reverse order, but nowhere in book does it state that order.

Don't know about you east coast people, but out here, we count from 1 and go to 2, then up to 3, and so on.

Do you really intend to win this argument on the basis that a runner from Delaware might have actually been taught to count backwards beginning from 3?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by SRW

Don't know about you east coast people, but out here, we count from 1 and go to 2, then up to 3, and so on.

And yet in football on both coasts the player runs from the 10 to the 9, to the 8, to the 7, to the 6, to the 5, to the 4, to the 3, to the 2, to the 1 before they can score.

Do you really intend to win this argument on the basis that a runner from Delaware might have actually been taught to count backwards beginning from 3?

I never stated or insinuated anyone count backwards, just that the ASA rule book simple states the runner must touch each of the 4 bases to score a run, not that they must be run in that particular order like NFHS rules do (8.3.1)

[txtrooper]

If I see this violation, I am invoking 8.3.D. Legal order for the bases means legal order; it should not have to be spelled out for us or anyone else to understand. It is an elementary theory of order 1, 2 3…….etc.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by txtrooper

If I see this violation, I am invoking 8.3.D. Legal order for the bases means legal order; it should not have to be spelled out for us or anyone else to understand. It is an elementary theory of order 1, 2 3…….etc.

Then why does NFHS and NCAA believe it to be necessary?

What would you do in a JO game if a pitcher, catcher or infielder entered the field of play on defense without a glove?

[txtrooper]

I haven't started calling High School or College games at this point and have not looked over the rule sets for them. It appears that the call is supported by ASA rule and the right thing to do. I understand that the situation above was a little different as the coach was granted time and did not allow the play to finish before calling time, although Rule 10 allows for the umpire to make it right and I believe they should do so. I know we are getting off the original post here, but I am going to take a stab at your question. If I had a defensive player enter the field w/o a glove, I would be concerned for her safety and advise the coach of my concerns. If the player refused to use a glove, I would not allow the player to remain on the field.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by txtrooper

I haven't started calling High School or College games at this point and have not looked over the rule sets for them. It appears that the call is supported by ASA rule and the right thing to do. I understand that the situation above was a little different as the coach was granted time and did not allow the play to finish before calling time, although Rule 10 allows for the umpire to make it right and I believe they should do so.

I'm not stating we should allow players to run the bases improperly, just taking SRW to task because he stated it was in the rule book when it is not stated as it is in other organizations.

I know we are getting off the original post here, but I am going to take a stab at your question. If I had a defensive player enter the field w/o a glove, I would be concerned for her safety and advise the coach of my concerns. If the player refused to use a glove, I would not allow the player to remain on the field.

Okay, under what rule would you not allow the player to participate? There is no requirement for any player to wear a glove. The first sentence to 3.4 reads "A Glove/Mitt may be worn by any player". Nowhere is there a rule (such as those involving other safety equipment) that require a player in any position, in any division or classification of play. It IS absolutely absurd for a player to not wear a legal glove or mitt while playing the game, but it is their choice.

[KJUmp]

OK, in agreement that ASA 8.3 does not tell us specifically what is the legal order of touching bases as does NCAA and FED, and would have been wrong in applying it to mb's sitch in the OP.

That being the case, what instance would we call a runner out (under 8.3.D) for running the bases in reverse order to either....(1) confuse the defense
or (2) make a travesty of the game?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by txtrooper

If I see this violation, I am invoking 8.3.D. Legal order for the bases means legal order; it should not have to be spelled out for us or anyone else to understand. It is an elementary theory of order 1, 2 3…….etc.

I get that, but if 1-2-3-H is the "normal order", then H-3-2-1 would be "backward" She didn't run 1-2-3-H, obviously... but she also didn't run H-3-2-1 (or any part of it). Just because she's started at the batters box doesn't mean she's starting at home. Batters box to 3rd is NOT the same as running to third after having achieved home plate.

And also remember that running backward is NOT illegal (happens often on caught flies, run downs, etc). Running backward with the intent of confusing the defense or making a travesty of the game is illegal. And I don't think that applies in the OP at all.

[txtrooper]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I get that, but if 1-2-3-H is the "normal order", then H-3-2-1 would be "backward" She didn't run 1-2-3-H, obviously... but she also didn't run H-3-2-1 (or any part of it). Just because she's started at the batters box doesn't mean she's starting at home. Batters box to 3rd is NOT the same as running to third after having achieved home plate.

And also remember that running backward is NOT illegal (happens often on caught flies, run downs, etc). Running backward with the intent of confusing the defense or making a travesty of the game is illegal. And I don't think that applies in the OP at all.

"Any part of it", third is still a part of the bases. I realize that batter runner starts in the batters box, although running to third is reverse order. Suppose nothing is done and the runner advances to home, the run can not score because the player never touched 1st or 2nd (ASA 5.5). I believe that this situation would provoke an appeal, but if it did not , what would you rule on the play?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by txtrooper

"Any part of it", third is still a part of the bases. I realize that batter runner starts in the batters box, although running to third is reverse order. Suppose nothing is done and the runner advances to home, the run can not score because the player never touched 1st or 2nd (ASA 5.5). I believe that this situation would provoke an appeal, but if it did not , what would you rule on the play?

Considering there is no valid rule for me to call this runner out, I would (as you did) expect this situation to provoke an appeal. I rather like Atl's suggestions regarding "steering" the coach to an appeal if he's not quite there - and then informing him that a coach cannot make an appeal - it has to come from a player... hopefully that would do it.

But barring an appeal, as much as I'd WANT to, I find no rule allowing me to call this runner out - and I suppose that if the defense is too stupid to appeal this obviously appealable play, well, they deserve to be scored on.

[Skahtboi]

Anyone besides me get the feeling that this thread has become just slightly convoluted?