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.

No need to ask us here. The ASA and NCAA rule books talk of forces going away when the batter-runner is put out in a couple of places:

RS #1.J: "When the batter-runner is put out prior to reaching first base, all force outs are eliminated."

RS #1.K: "Tag-Ups. When a runner leaves a base too soon on a caught fly ball and returns in an attempt to retouch, this is considered a time play and not a force out. When the appeal is the third out, all runs scored in advance of the appealed runner and prior to the legal appeal count.

RS #21: "It is not possible to have a force out on a caught fly ball as the batter-runner is no longer a runner."

RS #43: "An appeal play on a runner leaving a base too soon on a caught fly ball is a time play, not a force. When the appeal results in the third out of an
inning, any run scored prior the appeal counts."

NCAA 7.1.5.3: "If the appeal is the third out, and is successfully made on a base runner not forced to advance at the time of the infraction, all runs scored by base runners before the legal appeal was made, would count. Note: If a base runner leaves a base before a fly ball is first touched and returns in an attempt to retag, this is considered a timing play and not a force out."

NCAA 12.28.6: "If a base runner leaves a base too soon on a caught fly ball and returns in an attempt to retag, this is considered a timing play and not a force out. If the appeal is the third out, all runs scored by base runners in advance of the appealed base runner and scored ahead of the legal appeal would count."

I would add NFHS rulings, but since they apparently don't apply in NY, I wont bother.

If that "handful of umpires" won't believe LI after he shows them what's in the ASA and NCAA books, they sure as hell won't listen to us.

turd polishing
The act of trying to make something hopelessly weak and unattractive appear strong and appealing.

Unfortunately, there are umpires in our midsts that simply won't get much better. They either already know it all (and thus reject out of hand any constructive criticism), don't give a darn, or are part of that population that is virtually unconscious.

To explain a bit: I have been named the UIC and rules interpreter for our county high school softball association. I am relatively young, and have taken over for someone who had done the job for over 25 years. He resigned last year because he was beginning to get sick of trying to answer folks silly and obvious questions. He said to me that they don't read the rule book, and then will argue with the rules interpreter over little things that are SIMPLE.

My first charge is to change the culture in the association. I don't want, nor can't come across like a know-it-all. I figured if I posted the question, and then was able to show how many responses came back from umpires across the country saying what the ruling is and an explanation, it will show that: I will work to find answers for the "non-believers", and that I did NOT influence the responses. It's easy to say, Read the RULE book. But they don't. So, when a situation comes up, I hope to post it and get a response so I can share it with the masses.

It's a way to build some form of credibility. Plus, not only do I have to work WITH these same umpires, but I have to do what I can to LEAD them, and help them improve. Snapping back with a response, no matter whether I know the answer or not, will not work for some of these guys. Even when you SHOW them the rule, or explain the rationale....they will STILL argue it. So after saying what I said to 4 guys after a meeting we had, I told them I'd ask those who know about the rules because they help clarify them nationally. I took out my phone and posted the question, and got a response in 5 minutes. Thanks Rita. That's all I needed.

Most of out 150 umpires have no idea that I have national experience. Most of our 150 umpires don't care. To them, I'm still a young kid who took over for a legend and a long time mentor. And I have a LOT of work to do going forward.

To those who responded, thank you.

Thanks KJ - You hit the nail on the head.

What about putting together a test of the most common rules they seem to be having trouble with and make it mandatory that all umpires take and pass the test if they want to work games?

Knowing the rules or knowing and applying the rules correctly? There is a big difference.

If they are that stubborn that they won't believe what they read in the book, I still don't see how they are going to buy in on what other faceless "internet umpires" say.

From your first post, these guys believe a force exists after the batter-runner is put out on a caught fly ball. I quoted text from two rule books, ASA and NCAA, that explicitly contradicts their beliefs. You show them that text in those books for them to read. And they are really going to argue? And then you show them umpire discussion board responses that say they are wrong. They are going to believe that over black-and-white rulings in the books? Wow.

Manny, it's not as far-fetched as that. I've had numerous instances of showing someone (or a group) something in a book, having people not believe (or saying they interpret a pretty black and white rule differently, etc), and posting it here. There are 4-5 pretty high up ASA and FED muckimucks here, and most of us know who they are. If those people post something - it gets believed.

Human nature. Can't always predict it.

Perhaps. But I'm guessing umpires who believe a live-ball appeal of a runner failing to tag up properly is a force out don't recognize the names of those muckimucks.

You have a point!

Anytime partner!

I love what our Rules Interp did this year for our chapter. Handed out a copy of last years NFHS test and said, "Here's last years test, the next meeting is in two weeks, complete the test in that time frame, open book is fine. Your test must be turned in before you will be scheduled any games."
Most guys did the test open book and that's what he wanted because they had to dig thru the book to get answers. Better for a lot of guys who try to read the book from front to back and get bored halfway thru and then quit. It did well for us and gave a base line on the most missed questions so we could work on those problem areas.
Just a hint if you have your guys do this, have them place the rule citation number beside each answer to justify their answer. Then you can see where their thought process lies.

Problem I think most group would have with a rule like this is that they NEED those "dunderheads" to be able to cover all the games.

Based on my recent experience, they may be better off just grabbing some random person out of the stands and have them umpire the game. They may actually know more of the rules than some supposed umpires.

Situation: R1 on 3rd, R2 on 2nd. 1 out. Fly ball hit to F9 caught for 2nd out, R1 scores but left the base an instant before the catch. R2 tags up legally and advances to 3rd. On the play on R1 at HP, the ball is overthrown but stays in play. R2 scores. On appeal at 3rd base, R1 is out for 3rd out but since R2 socred before the out her run counts. Even though the runner ahead of her is put out for out #3. Is this correct?

Try the section in your rule book that starts with:

No run shall be scored if the third out of an inning is the result of: ..............

NCAA 6.1.3, ASA 5.5-B

Thanks. I got hung up on the language "When the appeal results in the third out ... any run scored prior to the appeal counts."

Of course
 

Haven't you seen the bats that you buy with the hands already attached?

Tell those umpires to read the definitions in the rulebook. I think all codes say something similar to : if a batted ball is caught before it hits the ground there can be no force plays.

Also, in the NFHS rulebook it clearly states in the appeals definitions section that tag up appeals are timing plays, and runs that scored prior to the appeal would count.

Okay, since you all seem to think I haven't told them to read the rule book - this is how bad it can be. They read the rules and bring it to me to ARGUE that since she doesn't need to be tagged it's a force. They think I don't know what I am talking about. They think I'm misinformed.

I sent out an email to all umpires because one of the umpires ruled that the run rule was 11, when it is 12. Another ruled that the runner gets one base on an overthrow. After sending my clarification to the RULE - I get questions like, "is that overthrows from the outfield? The infield is still 1 base right?" Or, "I know the rule book says that subs can not re-enter." Or, "is the run rule 15 after 5 and 12 after 3"? Or, "I told the coach that the runner must slide".

I was talking to 4 umpires who had the rule book in their hand and was arguing the idea that the play in question was a force out because she didn't need to be tagged. I said, you don't have to believe me, but if I can post this question to an umpiring board where prominent umpires from ASA who have sat on rules committees can respond and answer, or even if other umpires can answer, will that help to clarify? When they said yes, I agreed to post. They didn't know any of the "muckimucks" as one of you so "graciously" pointed out, but they wanted to see other's opinions to try to prove me wrong. It worked exactly as I thought it would.

A big part of my work is to gain credibility. I'm doing my best to see that happen. Maybe then will things change for the better.

Disappointed that some here question my rationale for posting, and others for thinking that I haven't suggested "reading the freakin rules" to these guys. But there is a way to go about it so that they WILL read the rules and learn something.

:rolleyes:

I think some of the comments like "read the rules" were sarcastic about your colleagues; rather than criticism of you.

AFAIC, even w/o the rule books, a runner can't be forced unless a runner or runners behind them are forcing them.

Citation: sandlot, age 9 ;)