Need NFHS Ruling

[varefump]

We had our first new member training class today and the following play came up. There was a lengthy discussion but no final approved ruling provided. With the new interference interpretation where intent is no longer a part of the equation, many felt that this play was not allowed.

Play: R2 on second, one out. Base hit to outfield. R2 rounds but misses 3rd base. Proceeds to a touches Home. Third base coach knows she missed 3rd and hollars for her to return. R2 retouches home on her way back to 3rd where she arrives safely.

Is this a legal play. Our lead trainer says that since R2 is a retired runner (by definition), she would be causing interference by drawing a throw when she returned to 3rd and therefore B1 (closest to home) would be declared out.

I feel that the definition of a retired runner should say "a runner who has legally scored..". Since R2 has not legally scored, she is allowed to retrace her steps the same as if she had missed 2nd base on the way to 3rd.

Please provide proper ruling and cite rule references.

Thanks.

[HugoTafurst]

Originally Posted by varefump

We had our first new member training class today and the following play came up. There was a lengthy discussion but no final approved ruling provided. With the new interference interpretation where intent is no longer a part of the equation, many felt that this play was not allowed.

Play: R2 on second, one out. Base hit to outfield. R2 rounds but misses 3rd base. Proceeds to a touches Home. Third base coach knows she missed 3rd and hollars for her to return. R2 retouches home on her way back to 3rd where she arrives safely.

Is this a legal play. Our lead trainer says that since R2 is a retired runner (by definition), she would be causing interference by drawing a throw when she returned to 3rd and therefore B1 (closest to home) would be declared out.

I feel that the definition of a retired runner should say "a runner who has legally scored..". Since R2 has not legally scored, she is allowed to retrace her steps the same as if she had missed 2nd base on the way to 3rd.

Please provide proper ruling and cite rule references.

Thanks.

I think your lead trainer is mistaken. I also think that although you have the correct answer (the runner may return to touch third in this case) it has nothing to do with being "retired"

Re-read 2-1-6 which spells out when a runner may NOT return to touch a missed base.
"Retired" is not part of the equation.

[Andy]

Case play 2.49 Sit B is applicable to your play.

*2.49 SITUATION B: The bases are loaded with R1 on third, R2 on second and R3 on first and one out. B5 hits a fly ball into short right field that appears to drop in for a base hit, despite three fielders converging to try to make the catch. R1 crosses home plate and all the other runners hold close to their bases. For some reason, R1 decides to go back to third. None of the umpires signaled an out. The ball actually hit the ground without being caught. The defense throws the ball to the catcher who touches home plate.
What is the ruling?

R1’s advancement to home was legal. R1’s run scores; bases remain loaded with one out. If the umpires deem that R1’s act of retreating after touching home interferes with a defensive player’s opportunity to make a play on another runner, the runner closest to home would be declared out, but R1’s run would still count. (8-6-18)

[BretMan]

I saw that case play earlier, but don't think it really applies here. The reason is that the case play involves a runner retreating that has no business being in the basepaths, while the play in the first post involves a runner who has every right to go back and correct her baserunning mistake.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Andy

Case play 2.49 Sit B is applicable to your play.

*2.49 SITUATION B: The bases are loaded with R1 on third, R2 on second and R3 on first and one out. B5 hits a fly ball into short right field that appears to drop in for a base hit, despite three fielders converging to try to make the catch. R1 crosses home plate and all the other runners hold close to their bases. For some reason, R1 decides to go back to third. None of the umpires signaled an out. The ball actually hit the ground without being caught. The defense throws the ball to the catcher who touches home plate.
What is the ruling?

R1’s advancement to home was legal. R1’s run scores; bases remain loaded with one out. If the umpires deem that R1’s act of retreating after touching home interferes with a defensive player’s opportunity to make a play on another runner, the runner closest to home would be declared out, but R1’s run would still count. (8-6-18)

It also presumes that the other runners advance safely on/after the throw home because the case says "the other runners hold close to their bases". Not automatic.

[SergioJ]

Originally Posted by BretMan

I saw that case play earlier, but don't think it really applies here. The reason is that the case play involves a runner retreating that has no business being in the basepaths, while the play in the first post involves a runner who has every right to go back and correct her baserunning mistake.

I think the case play you're looking for is 8.3.1 SITUATION C.

Since there was no following runner that scored, R2 can go back and touch the missed base, provided she does it in accordance with the rules (just like BretMan said).


Serg

[UmpireErnie]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

It also presumes that the other runners advance safely on/after the throw home because the case says "the other runners hold close to their bases". Not automatic.

Exactly. I am standing off of home plate with my mask off waiting for the rest of the play. We're not done yet!