I've always preferred to be a rulebook student rather than a rulebook lawyer.

Allow me to apologize. He's one of mine.

:confused:

:(

Rule 8 Batter-Runner and Runner
Section 2. Batter-Runner is Out
Section 7. Runner is Out

Section 2 would obviously apply because we have a Batter-Runner (BR).

8.2.M.3 clearly identifies the sitch in the OP, and provides the Effect. If a play is made at 1st base on the BR, regardless of what happens subsequent to that play, the BR is still required to use the contrasting color portion of the base. If the throw to 1st is wide (or high) and pulls F3 off the bag, the BR is still obligated to use the contrasting color portion of the bag (a play is made on the BR). If the ball gets away from F3, BR only contacts the white portion of the bag and then decides to continue to 2nd, the runner is still obligated to touch 1st as part of normal base-running responsibilities. Remember, having passed 1st base, the BR becomes a runner.

The appeal window is still open, until the BR returns to 1st (8.2.M.3), or until the defense properly requests a live ball appeal. Any fielder in possession of the ball must touch the base missed, or tag the runner committing the violation, if they are still on the playing field.

If play has ended and time is called (or next pitch occurs, legal or illegal), the appeal window has expired.

Hey now. I'm a student of the book too, just sometimes like to see things from left field ... and I warned everybody before I started I was going off into left field. Besides I've been off the field all summer with eye surgery, so I have an excuse to overthink things.

But, dude, answered back on post #3, and reinforced on post #6 of this thread. But, continued efforts to discredit only reinforced the obvious (at least to most, it would seem).

On another note, hope the surgery was successful for you.

SRW, good to see you back from time to time.

Is this procedure also applicable to ASA slow pitch, or is a verbal appeal acceptable prior to the runner touching first?

I'm sorry about that. I thought I made it very clear that I was only talking about a shortcoming in the book in each post but especially in post 13 where I broached the topic. How to call this I agree is totally obvious. The rule that allows you to do it is all I was questioning as I thought it may have been completely missed. Now I think it was just partially missed.

You too??? Must be something about being on these boards. What was yours for? I had a retinal reattachment myself this summer.

Mine was not nearly as bad as that. Elective in fact. I had PRK (a Laser correction for nearsightedness) and they made me stay out of my contacts for a while before doing it.

dude??????:eek:

Shows you how percerptions can be wrong on the internet.....
For some reason, you were one of the last people on this board I would expect to see using that noun.:eek::eek:

Admittedly not a standard part of my vocabulary. So you weren't completely out of line in your thinking. I was in high school in the 60's, college in the early 70's (started umpiring in 1972, actually), and resemble the general commentary that if you remember much about those years, then you probably weren't really there.

But if you knew SRW, I bet you would think it was appropriate for him. At least I do. Mike, what say you??

SRW and I had a couple of beers yesterday. "Dude" was used a couple of times. It was common in my HS (in MD no less) in 1970. :cool:

Thanks. I never left... just lurking, based on the advice from others.

We're close in age, but you are way ahead of me as an umpire... only about 18 yrs here)

So tell me, how can we forget so much about those days, but remember every word to every song that was released from then?

Dude...