Runs Scored

[MrRabbit]

NFHS / ASA Rules...

R1 on third, R2 on second, R3 on first and 1 out.
B5 hits safely to right field.
R1 scores,
R2 misses third base and scores.
R3 is thrown out at third.
Playing action ends defensive team makes a dead ball appeal R2 missed third on her way home.
Umpire declares R2 out.
How many runs score?

[NCASAUmp]

R1 scores. The out on R2 is not a force out, as a trailing runner (R3) had already been declared out.

You can never, ever have a force out on a runner when a runner who's trailing them has already been declared out.

[IRISHMAFIA]

ASA RS#1.J Last Sentence......

"On an appeal play, the force out is determined by when the appeal is made, not when the infraction occurred."

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

R1 scores. The out on R2 is not a force out, as a trailing runner (R3) had already been declared out.

You can never, ever have a force out on a runner when a runner who's trailing them has already been declared out.

Except for helmet removal.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

Except for helmet removal.

Good catch there. Forgot about that one.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

ASA RS#1.J Last Sentence......

"On an appeal play, the force out is determined by when the appeal is made, not when the infraction occurred."

Speakin ASA.

[MrRabbit]

Then the call is the same for ASA and NFHS?

[SamG]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

R1 scores. The out on R2 is not a force out, as a trailing runner (R3) had already been declared out.

You can never, ever have a force out on a runner when a runner who's trailing them has already been declared out.

But even if R2 IS a force out, the run (R1) would still score, wouldn't it? Let's change the situation a little...
Bases loaded, one out.
Ground ball to F6... she throws to F5 for the force on R2.
F5 sees R3 making it to 2nd, so tries to make a play on B/R at first.
B/R is safe and F3 throws back to F5 who tags R3 trying to steal.

There's still three outs and R1 still scores. So why does the timing matter (in the OP)? What am I missing?

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by SamG

But even if R2 IS a force out, the run (R1) would still score, wouldn't it?

Nope.

Originally Posted by SamG

Let's change the situation a little...
Bases loaded, one out.
Ground ball to F6... she throws to F5 for the force on R2.
F5 sees R3 making it to 2nd, so tries to make a play on B/R at first.
B/R is safe and F3 throws back to F5 who tags R3 trying to steal.

There's still three outs and R1 still scores. So why does the timing matter (in the OP)? What am I missing?

What difference does it make the order in which the outs were attempted?

ASA 5-5-B: No run shall be scored if the third out of the inning is the result of:
1. A batter-runner being called out prior to reaching first base or any other runner forced out due to the batter becoming a batter-runner.

They can throw the ball around all they want, but if the third out is a force out, no runs may score.

Make sense?

[SamG]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Nope.



What difference does it make the order in which the outs were attempted?


They can throw the ball around all they want, but if the third out is a force out, no runs may score.

Make sense?

I understand that. I guess what I missed was how R2 missing the bag would be considered a 'force out', which from the PP, I understand it's not. It's only if it WAS a force out (and happened AFTER R3 was out, which is impossible) would the run not count.

OK, that sentence doesn't make total sense, but I think I understand.

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by MrRabbit

Then the call is the same for ASA and NFHS?

I just had an extremely long conversation with a well respected baseball and softball rules interpreter and author.

Here's what I confirmed/learned.

Check your 2004 ASA rule book, if you still have one laying around. ASA changed their interpretation of the definition of a force as it pertained to an appeal play. Another person already quoted it as follows: "On an appeal play, the force out is determined when the appeal is made, not when the infraction occurred."

Prior to 2004, that was not ASA's rule/interpretation.

Only ASA (among all softball codes) has adopted this definition/interpretation.

Consequently, in ASA, the run does score.

However, in all other codes, including NFHS and NCAA, the run does NOT score. They keep the "retroactive" force play.

I'm sure this will create some controversy, but that's the interpretation. MLB is currently discussing possibly changing their interpretation as well.

There are some case plays that illustrate why ASA has gone with this interpretation, but I'll leave them out for now.

Fire away

[MrRabbit]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

I just had an extremely long conversation with a well respected baseball and softball rules interpreter and author.

Here's what I confirmed/learned.

Check your 2004 ASA rule book, if you still have one laying around. ASA changed their interpretation of the definition of a force as it pertained to an appeal play. Another person already quoted it as follows: "On an appeal play, the force out is determined when the appeal is made, not when the infraction occurred."

Prior to 2004, that was not ASA's rule/interpretation.

Only ASA (among all softball codes) has adopted this definition/interpretation.

Consequently, in ASA, the run does score.

However, in all other codes, including NFHS and NCAA, the run does NOT score. They keep the "retroactive" force play.

I'm sure this will create some controversy, but that's the interpretation. MLB is currently discussing possibly changing their interpretation as well.

There are some case plays that illustrate why ASA has gone with this interpretation, but I'll leave them out for now.

Fire away

You are correct I got the same explanation from a high place person.

ASA waits until the defense appeals and makes the ruling from that point in time. So the run scores from third.

NFHS Keep the "retroactive" force play. So the run from third does not
score.

[MrRabbit]

There are some case plays that illustrate why ASA has gone with this interpretation, but I'll leave them out for now.

I for one would like to see a list of them.

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by MrRabbit

There are some case plays that illustrate why ASA has gone with this interpretation, but I'll leave them out for now.

I for one would like to see a list of them.

For example:

Would it be logical to apply a "retroactive" force out in the following play.

R3 on 3rd. R1 on 1st. 1 out. Ball hit to right field. R3 scores (nothing else going on her R3). R1 misses 2nd and starts to 3rd base. Meanwhile, F9 fires the ball in and guns out BR going for a double. BR is out #2. Now that BR is out of the picture, there is no preceding runner holding R1 back. How can R1 logically be prevented from returning all the way to 1st base? That isn't to say it would be rational for R1 to go back to 1st base. Rather, the argument is used to justifying the rule. The only way to keep her back from 1st is to have a runner "force" her from it. That doesn't exist here.

That's one example. I have a few more after my conversation tonight.

I might be able to add to that number if the double jacks are-a-flow'n when we meet up tomorrow night for a state meeting.

Stay tuned.

[MrRabbit]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

For example:

Would it be logical to apply a "retroactive" force out in the following play.

R3 on 3rd. R1 on 1st. 1 out. Ball hit to right field. R3 scores (nothing else going on her R3). R1 misses 2nd and starts to 3rd base. Meanwhile, F9 fires the ball in and guns out BR going for a double. BR is out #2. Now that BR is out of the picture, there is no preceding runner holding R1 back. How can R1 logically be prevented from returning all the way to 1st base? That isn't to say it would be rational for R1 to go back to 1st base. Rather, the argument is used to justifying the rule. The only way to keep her back from 1st is to have a runner "force" her from it. That doesn't exist here.

That's one example. I have a few more after my conversation tonight.

I might be able to add to that number if the double jacks are-a-flow'n when we meet up tomorrow night for a state meeting.

Stay tuned.

Thank you esqump I am sure this his a lot of people looking for their old books.

Looking forward to more examples.

Also wonder if the original comments / thoughts, etc are available somewhere?

Also have a cold one for me.