Bases loaded walk
 

JV game. Bases loaded walk. Runner from 3rd does not touch home. She starts heading to their dugout on the 1st base side about 5 feet from home and cuts in front of home. About the time she gets to the on deck circle, the coach for the defense yells to for her team to touch home. The runner comes back to touch home but the defense throws home first (catcher steps on the plate and also tags the girl before she touches home). PU calls her out.

What rule?

On any other base on a walk, if you pass the bag "you are assumed to have touched it" and are liable to be put out, but how does that work for home plate?

The same.

The umpire was wrong. The defensive coach was wrong and made the umpire wrong.

There are two possibly applicable rules, and neither was violated at that point.

1) 8-6-7 for failing to touch the base; must be properly appealed. It wasn't properly appealed, because on that awarded base, runners must be given an opportunity to complete their running obligations, and that opportunity does not end until either a) the runner stops on a different base (inapplicable here) or b) enters dead ball territory (didn't happen, according to the OP).

2) 8-6-19 for abandoning the base; not an appeal, the umpire must make this call if it applies. But it doesnt, the rule continues with "by entering dead ball territory". Again, didn't happen.

So, the coach tipped off the offense prematurely, and eliminated the opportunity to apply either rule. Runner should have been safe once she returned and touched the base because the appeal should not have been honored.

Not the same. Runners are not liable to be put out after scoring. A live ball appeal at home should not have been allowed in this situation.

Ok I'm confused and will have to pull my book out when I get a chance....but to say a live ball appeal is not allowed in this case seems incorrect to me. How is this case any different than a runner that hook slides at home and misses the base? In that case we honor an F2 that live ball appeals the runner missing home why is it different just because this was a walk? They still have the requirement to legally touch the bases. I will try to pull the rule references when I get a chance but why are we considering this live ball appeal void?

A walk in fast pitch is a live ball, and any other runner who advances to the next base and goes past it is liable to be put out, so why not home?

Home was not the awarded base, AFA ASA is concerned. Fed is the opposite. Steve may be right in FED.

Really?? That's news to me. I don't recall seeing anything that says a runner's obligation at home is different, and that she isn't subject to an appeal at home until she enters the dugout.

From the NFHS Case Book:

2.1 SITUATION: With R1 on third and one out, B3 hits safely. R1, while watching the ball, misses home plate. F2 calls for the ball, steps on home for the appeal to retire R1 and throws to third to get B3 sliding. RULING: Legal. A runner may be put out by the defense for missing a base during a live-ball appeal.

No reference there that an appeal of R1 cannot be recognized until R1 enters DBT. So what am I missing?

Goes to whether the runner is considered "awarded" home due to the walk, or forced due to the batter being awarded 1B (see the 1st thread below in "Similar Threads")
In the first case, I would not have her in jeopardy of being appealed until she enters DBT, in the second, I would rule on an appeal as soon as she passed home plate untouched.

Yes, this is the key distinction.

And, Fed's rule book is not completely clear, but as I read it, the BR is awarded 1B, and the other runners advance if forced (and, hence, their base is not an award). The other runners are not in jeopardy while advancing to the next base, but are in jeopardy if they advance beyond, and they are certainly in jeopardy of a missed base appeal should they attempt to advance beyond.

Passing the plate when forced to advance it is not like passing a base where another one is ahead.

Advance w/o liability means forced to score with not being able to be put out. BUT, that leaves us saying the runner could go straight to the dugout w/o touching home plate. :confused:

I still don't see the difference whether or not the base is an awarded base or a forced-to base. Rule 8-3-11 says, "Awarded bases must be run legally." That implies to me that if a runner passes an awarded base and misses it, she is subject to a live ball appeal. And 8-3-4 says that passing a base is considered touching that base, even for awarded bases. Again, the implication to me is that a live ball appeal of the runner for passing and missing an awarded base is viable.

Say the batter-runner overruns first base on a walk, and misses the base in the process. If the defense appeals her miss by either tagging her or the base before she returns, is she not subject to an Out call? If not, why not? What rule protects her here? And if she is subject to an Out call, why wouldn't the same be true at any other base, including home?

The base on balls is the red-headed stepchild in the family of base awards, since the ball remains live. In other base awards, a live ball appeal is not even a possibility and the umpire must allow the awarded runner to complete her base-running responsibilities before honoring an appeal.

OK, so instead of a BB w/ bases loaded, the batter is HBP. Now we have a dead ball.

How much does that change this scenario assuming everything else remains the same?

I do understand the logic of both sides of this - and using logic alone, one could support either side of this argument, as TPTB have not defined this perfectly.

However, the interp I typed (and ATL typed) is the one we've been given from our higher ups.

Look up ASA case play 8.1-11. Runner who missed the plate may be ruled out on appeal.

Runners must be given the opportunity to complete their base running responsibilities before a dead ball appeal can be heard. Therefore, the appeal on R1 cannot be heard until she enters the dugout (and, hence, has no further opportunity to go back and touch home plate).

The OP is fed rules (at least I assume so, since it is a JV game), but clearly a runner missing home plate can be appealed; that is not in question.

This is sort of a poorly worded section in the rulebook in my opinion, HOWEVER, 8-1-1 situation F does cover a play involving a bases loaded walk.

In the situation, a player is thrown out after rounding a base, but before R1 touches home.

The comments states, that the R1 is AWARDED home, therefore the run would count even if a runner was thrown out after passing a base they had been awarded.

The rules also say a runner has to run awarded bases properly though.

what reason did the PU provide to call the runner out?

To my mind, ASA has this one right, where FED does not. But given that the OP was FED, the runner from 3rd is AWARDED home (chap posts one of the places that shows FED feels this way), and on an award the runner must be given the opportunity to fix baserunning mistakes.

In ASA, this is clearly an out.

There are several rules in play on this call.

First, as stated from the CB play, the player is awarded home plate because she was forced to advance on the award of first for a Base on balls.

Second, rule 8-3-4 states that when a runner has based a base, she is said to have touched it. It specifically adds "This also applies to awarded bases".


Third, the fact that a base on balls is a live ball in fast pitch.


Fourth, A live ball appeal is allowed for a runner missing a base.

This leads me to this conclusion: Since the awarded base was passed by the runner she is said to have touched the base, and since the ball is live after a base on balls an appeal on her missing the base can be granted as soon as she missed home plate, thus the umpire was correct in ruling the runner out on a live ball appeal.

This play is different than the case play in that in the case play, the out was made on a different runner, who arrived at and passed the base she was awarded and was then tagged out. In the case play, the runner awarded home had not yet touched home plate. A timing play can't occur on a player who is awarded he base, so the out counts, but since home was an award, the run counts as well.

Disagree, based on rule 8-4-1. She was said to have touched the base when she passed the base. A missed base can be a live ball appeal, thus the appeal is granted and the call is out.

That is illogical. Either the run scores (in which case the runner cannot be declared out), or the runner is declared out and the run does not score. A run cannot be scored by a runner who is out.

I worded it poorly. In the casebook play, the situation would be a timing player. The R2 is thrown out at 3rd base after advancing from second to third on a base on balls passing the base and being tagged out , however R1, who was on third had not yet scored. Since she was forced to advance on the base on balls, she is awarded home plate. The timing of R2 being thrown out, does not impact R1 scoring, since she was awarded home on a bases load base on balls.

Rule or case play cite, please.

I agree with you on a dead ball appeal. There are plenty of case plays where a runner is awarded a base (or bases) when the ball is batted/thrown into DBT, and the runner is allowed to fix a base running mistake until she advances to and touches the base beyond the one where the mistake was made.

But on a live ball appeal, where does it say this premise also holds true? I've never seen a case play that says that, and never heard of it until this discussion.

I repeat the play that I mentioned earlier that nobody has addressed:

That would be because this is the only instance where a base award happens during a live ball.

Given that the situation we're discussing is the ONLY time we have an awarded base during a live ball, I'd ask you the converse. Where does it say to treat this case differently than the other? It doesn't.

Another element of the OP is that the runner "cuts in front of home" on her way to the 1B dugout, so she should never be considered to have touched (passed) the base.

Ok, so the batter receives Ball Four, and the pitch gets away from the catcher. The BR rounds first on her way to second base and makes it safely. The defensive coach instructs his team to do a Live Ball appeal at first because the BR missed first base (which she did). F2 throws the ball to first base and it gets away from F3 and goes down the right field line.

Is the BR allowed to go back and touch first? Or is she no longer able to because she advanced and touched second?

Second is not an awarded base in this case.

This is not correct. Albeit, I've never seen the other case.

Can you name another instance? I believe tom is correct.

But let me suggest this ;)

Is not a baserunner permitted to set their own basepath?

What if you have the runner taking a couple steps past home to pick up a discarded bat and then turn to touch the plate?

Not saying it is the smartest move in the world, but there certainly isn't anything wrong with it, either. Point is, where are you drawing the line?

Yes I can, but I didn't in the first post to give everbody time to think. Handling the ball with detached equipment is a live ball award.

Key word in your post. PASSED. Under Fed rules when she has PASSED a base she is said to have touched the base. For a runner coming from 3b home, there is a very clear line as to what past the base is. It is the first base line, which is nicely drawn on the field of play for everyone to see.

If the runner stays over toward the 3b dug out to pick up a bat then touches home we have a different situation because she has not passed home plate yet and at this point she is still allowed to set her own base path as no play can legally be made on her since she is getting an awarded base.

No, but first base was. And I was trying to counter Mike's point that there is nothing written that treats the case of a live ball base award any differently than a dead ball base award.

He said that since there is no difference between the two, then you could argue that the BR who advances to second on a walk/wild pitch while not touching first base would not be able to return to first to correct her mistake while the ball remains live. After all, she wouldn't be able to do that on a dead ball award. But I think we all would agree that the BR could return during live ball play.

So, your position is you would rule differently based on which dugout her team may be in when she hasn't touched home nor entered dead ball territory? After all, if her team is in the third base dugout, she might never have "passed" the base, while missing it by even MORE than the OP.

Do you not see how that distinction would treat the teams on the field differently for doing the exact same thing? Do you think that would be the intent of any rule or approved ruling?

Using this logic, a runner who shortcuts the base cannot be considered as having touched is because they never passed it.

I disagree. That is an exemption from liability to be put out, not an award.

And making it an award would preclude the runner from returning to touch a missed base or base left too soon

Since award isn't defined by rule I guess you you could make that claim but I'm not sure what the difference would be. The rule for a dropped third strike that is fielded with detached equipment specifically refers to to an award of first base.

When do you consider a runner to have passed the base? You need to be able to answer that question to be able to rule on appeals for a missed base.

There is no difference between a runner who misses a base by stepping with one foot on either side of the base, and running 10 feet inside of the base, short cutting the infield. As soon as they pass the base, they are subject to appeal for missing the base. Home plate is no different. As soon as they pass home plate they are subject to appeal for missing the plate.

The way the rules are written, yes the umpire needs to rule on the team on the third base side different from the first base side. Given the way the rules regarding running awarded bases, making plays on an runner awarded a base, and appeals are written, the runner for a team in the third base dug out would need to do something else to be ruled out on appeal, such as enter dead ball territory, or not have touched the base before the next pitch.

One other thing to consider, the umpire can rule the play dead under casebook play 8-3-11 situation c, when the runner acts in a manner not consistent with fair play. If the runner is intentionally not touching home plate, the umpire can declare the ball dead, require the runner to touch home plate, and issue a warning for unsportsmanlike behavior.

Oh, come on. :eek: Back to earth, please.

There is a reason the casebook play is in the casebook. Somewhere a team tried gaining an advantage by having a player do what is in the casebook play.

And where in any of the original play do you ascertain the runner is intentionally not touching the plate?

Okay, if you insist, but how can you make an award if the BR is permitted to continue beyond that base? Awards are applied at the end of a play, not during. When there is a fielder who uses detached equipment, do you make a DDB signal and announce the base to which the runner/BR is "awarded" or do you let the play finish and then ensure the runners achieve or are awarded the appropriate number of bases.

Well, first I've never seen it. Second, if I was trained on the correct mechanic I don't remember, but here's how I've imagined I would do it. I'd make a ddb signal, call out illegal, and then an appropriate award signal and then I'd sit back and enjoy the chaos.
But yeah, I'm not about to claim that I know that to be correct.

You seem to be making the claim that their can't be live ball awards and therefore this can't be a live ball award. But a walk is a live ball award and it doesn't engender the problems you're concerned about so I'm not sure why this would be the case.

With the DDB signal, you announce there will be a dead ball at the end of the play. At that point you announce any awards, which may be impacted by the actual result of the play (hence, you cannot announce them before the play ends).

Yeah, I can see where announcing "illegal" may cause chaos since it is not appropriate.

Which is exactly where we were when I agreed with Dakota and the follow-up by MD Longhorn.

Where are we coming up with the idea that we must allow runners to complete their running responsibilities during a LIVE ball appeal? This is included in DEAD ball appeals to preclude the defense from requesting time to PREVENT the runners from correcting running mistakes. This does not apply during a live ball appeal. Otherwise, any runner leaving early could just trot back to the base he left, even if a defensive player was standing on the base with the ball, as long as the ball remained live.

By rule, allowing runners to complete base-running responsibilities only comes into play for Dead Ball appeals due to the ball going into DBT. At least that's what it says under NFHS 2-1-3-b-2, USA Rule Supplement 1-C-2, and NCAA 7.1.2.2.3. There is no such thing as a base-running responsibility that can be corrected and not be subject to a live ball appeal.

I believe that there is at least one example. I had this: R1 and R3, 1 out. Both runners leave their bases on the release of the pitch. The BR hits a line drive, caught by F4. Before either runner can tag up, F4 throws the ball into DBT in an attempt to retire R1 on the live ball appeal. R3 fails to retouch 3B, and advances home.

R3 had the opportunity to correct/complete her baserunning responsibility at 3B anytime before touching the plate and was not subject to a live ball appeal.

In this game, the defense head coach made a proper dead ball appeal to U3 for the third out of the inning.