Run scores?
 

R1 on 3rd, R2 on 2nd, R4 on 1st. 1 out. Fly ball hit to F9 caught for 2nd out, they throw back to first to get R4 who never tagged and was going back to base but didn't make it in time. R1 crossed the plate before the legal appeal of R4. Run scores, right?

I have a handful of umpires who are saying it's a force out and no runs can score on a force out. I say it's not a force out, it's an appeal play and a timing play.

Yes it does.

Rita

the force was removed when the fly ball was caught.

Your handful of umpires should turn in their indicators and ride off into the campfire.

You have a handful of pretenders, not umpires.

2011 NYSSO TEST

84. R3 is on 3rd base and R1 is on 1st base with one out when B1 hits a fly ball to right field. When F9 catches the fly ball, R3 legally tags up and scores before R1 is retired returning to 1st base:
a. No runs wills score on that double play and the inning is over
b. The out on R1 at 1st base is a force out
c. The play stands and the inning is over but the run by R3 counts
d. R3’s run is nullified because of the force out on R1 at 1st base

Where does anyone get the idea that it is a force out?

The thought process of 1) not reading any definitions beacuse they already "know" the game, and 2) if you don't have to tag the runner, just the base, it must be a "force".

And the hands are part of the bat. ;) :eek: :eek:

Umpiring 101. Those guys should all have to go back and repeat the class.

LI, with all those credentials in your signature block, including NCAA, did you really have any doubts? Your question is the classic example used in virtually every clinic, and written in every set of case books and approved rulings on what constitutes a timing play.

Not to put words in LI's mouth but.....
Knowing LI and having had the opportunity to work some games with him over the past few years in different venues and under different codes.....I have no doubt that he knows the rule.

I think perhaps(?) what he was trying to accomplish in writing the post the way he did was to be able to show the "handful of umpires" in his local association who are being stubborn and obstinate with him about this sitch being a force play our replies to his question as a way to illustrate to these dunderheads just how wrong they all are about a very basic rule.

Well, he probably won't show it to them without some editing, I'd guess! :D

Why not?? Can't continue to polish the turd(s).

Insults / name-calling are not the only alternative, you know. He does (presumably) still have to work with them.