Co-ed Missed Base

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

But that's just it. R2 is forced to advance because the batter became a batter-runner. R2 no longer has the right to occupy his base because of this, and therefore, I believe this is a force out.

Think about what you just said, I see it as the key to this situation.

The batter becoming a batter-runner works for one base with me. After passing first, is that the batter becoming a batter-runner, or isn't that individual now a runner?

Bottom line to me, no such thing as a two base force out. Required to advance because the batter got a two base award is not a force out in my book. Timing play.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

Think about what you just said, I see it as the key to this situation.

The batter becoming a batter-runner works for one base with me. After passing first, is that the batter becoming a batter-runner, or isn't that individual now a runner?

Bottom line to me, no such thing as a two base force out. Required to advance because the batter got a two base award is not a force out in my book. Timing play.

I understand, and I'm focusing on 8-5-A:

When forced to vacate a base because the batter was awarded a base on balls.

R2 is forced to vacate his/her base. Their word.

[IRISHMAFIA]

FORCE OUT: An out which may be made only when a runner loses the right to the base that the runner is occupying because the batter becomes a batter-runner, and before the batter-runner or a trailing runner has been put out.

8.1. THE BATTER BECOMES A BATTER-RUNNER
C. When four balls have been called by the umpire. The batter-runner is awarded first base
Effect
4. (Co-ed) The ball is dead. A walk to a male batter will result in a two base award. The next batter (a female) shall bat.

Don't disagree this doesn't seem right, but would it be a force out the runner started on 1B and missed 2B on the way to 3B? If so, what's the difference? Remember, we are only talking about a player forced to vacate a base and not touching the base to which she is forced.

As Dave said, it is the way the rule is written and I don't think it would be wrong to treat this as a force. Especially since a protest would have the weight of the rule behind it.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

But that's just it. R2 is forced to advance because the batter became a batter-runner. R2 no longer has the right to occupy his base because of this, and therefore, I believe this is a force out.

I don't buy it, but let me ask you this.

Say BR simply refuses to go to 2nd, or leaves the field of play after advancing to 1st. Would we treat the out at 2nd as a force? Of course not.

More food for thought. A ground rule double is also a 2-base award. A runner from 2nd would similarly be "forced" to vacate 2nd base. However, if you ruled such a player missing 3rd base on his way home to be a "force out", you'd be laughed out of the locker room. So why is THIS 2-base award different from THAT 2-base award?

Answer ... it's not.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I don't buy it, but let me ask you this.

Say BR simply refuses to go to 2nd, or leaves the field of play after advancing to 1st. Would we treat the out at 2nd as a force? Of course not.

More food for thought. A ground rule double is also a 2-base award. A runner from 2nd would similarly be "forced" to vacate 2nd base. However, if you ruled such a player missing 3rd base on his way home to be a "force out", you'd be laughed out of the locker room. So why is THIS 2-base award different from THAT 2-base award?

Answer ... it's not.

The answer is that they are, by their very nature, very different.

On a two base award (or ground rule double), the award is made to every runner, including the batter-runner. In this kind of an award, if there are two runners who would be awarded the same base, the bases awarded would be first governed by the lead runner (8-3-B and 8-3-E).

In the OP, however, the base award only applies to the batter-runner, and the positions of all other runners are governed by the batter-runner's awarded base. The other runners are not "awarded" bases, they are simply allowed to advance without liability to be put out when they are forced to advance.

That, to me, is a big difference.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I don't buy it, but let me ask you this.

Say BR simply refuses to go to 2nd, or leaves the field of play after advancing to 1st. Would we treat the out at 2nd as a force? Of course not.

No, because it is a dead ball.

More food for thought. A ground rule double is also a 2-base award. A runner from 2nd would similarly be "forced" to vacate 2nd base. However, if you ruled such a player missing 3rd base on his way home to be a "force out", you'd be laughed out of the locker room. So why is THIS 2-base award different from THAT 2-base award?

Answer ... it's not.

Yeah, it is because, as noted, all runners are awarded bases on a GRD or any ball which goes out of play. Only the batter is awarded base(s) on a walk.

Look, no one is arguing this isn't strange or even arguable, but as the rules read, it is what it is

[NCASAUmp]

Reported.