Run scores ... or not... or yes it does 2 innings later

[Dakota]

Leaving that aside (appeal v protest), he does validate my view that this is not a mere scorekeeping error. It is an erroneous ruling by the umpires, and cannot be corrected unless it is done within the time allowed or follows proper protest procedure if corrected later (replay from the point of the overruled ruling).

I've read both Steve's and Mike's responses, but remain unconvinced (no disrespect intended).

And, neither am I convinced by an argument around ad hocing things since protests are not allowed by the state high school association. If protests are not allowed, they are not allowed, which means everyone must live with the incorrect ruling.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Leaving that aside (appeal v protest), he does validate my view that this is not a mere scorekeeping error. It is an erroneous ruling by the umpires, and cannot be corrected unless it is done within the time allowed or follows proper protest procedure if corrected later (replay from the point of the overruled ruling).

Where does the rules make such a statement? Please don't cite 10.3.C as there was no reversal of a call that placed a team in jeopardy. The inning was complete and no subsequent play was affected by the call.

I've read both Steve's and Mike's responses, but remain unconvinced (no disrespect intended).

None taken, but JJ is a she and this is the type of compromise a UIC is paid to handle. The only thing that the crew did was put a number up on the board that should have been there two innings earlier.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Where does the rules make such a statement?

Which statement are you refering to?

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

and no subsequent play was affected by the call.

Demonstrably untrue over the history of this game. Teams play differently when they are behind v. tied or ahead. They take more risks, etc. The reversal of the ruling to score the run took away from the losing team the opportunity to make those more aggressive / risky plays

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

...but JJ is a she...

Thanks for the correction. I knew that, but didn't catch the mistake in my post.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Which statement are you refering to?

"It is an erroneous ruling by the umpires, and cannot be corrected unless it is done within the time allowed or follows proper protest procedure if corrected later (replay from the point of the overruled ruling)."

Demonstrably untrue over the history of this game. Teams play differently when they are behind v. tied or ahead. They take more risks, etc. The reversal of the ruling to score the run took away from the losing team the opportunity to make those more aggressive / risky plays

I disagree twice. To start, there was no subsequent play. The inning ended at that point, so nothing more occurred that was affected by that ruling.

Secondly, the score is a weak excuse. Used to tell my team to always play as if we were down ten. IMO, playing otherwise is foolish.

You should be playing to win all the time. Obviously, that team did not play well enough to win. There is no argument, one team legally and officially scored more runs than the other in the official number of innings.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

"It is an erroneous ruling by the umpires, and cannot be corrected unless it is done within the time allowed or follows proper protest procedure if corrected later (replay from the point of the overruled ruling)."

C'mon, Mike. The protest needs to be filed in the time allowed (during which the umpires may have seen their error and corrected it), or if not, the protest is ruled on later, and the game replayed from the point of the erroneous ruling.

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I disagree twice. To start, there was no subsequent play. The inning ended at that point, so nothing more occurred that was affected by that ruling.

Secondly, the score is a weak excuse. Used to tell my team to always play as if we were down ten. IMO, playing otherwise is foolish.

You should be playing to win all the time. Obviously, that team did not play well enough to win. There is no argument, one team legally and officially scored more runs than the other in the official number of innings.

You seem to be focused on the "jeopardy" part of this or something. It was a misinterpretation of the definition of a force out that needs to be corrected... but corrected properly.

And, don't give me the "always give 110%" speech. If a team is down by a run in the late innings, they will take greater risks. For example, runner on 3rd, attempt a squeeze play. If the scored is tied, they will not necessarily attempt such a risky play. I shouldn't have to tell you this.

This was a protest situation that was not followed by the offended team. And, as I posted earlier, if the state league is not allowing protests, then there is no remedy for this at all.

If this can be corrected as it was, how long is too long? Later that evening? The next day? After the following game in the post season has been played?

If it can't be corrected 5 days later, where is your rule book now?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

C'mon, Mike. The protest needs to be filed in the time allowed (during which the umpires may have seen their error and corrected it), or if not, the protest is ruled on later, and the game replayed from the point of the irroneous ruling.

But those options were not permitted. It is what it is, and the final score was correct. Would you be so forgiving if the umpires refused to allow the run acknowledging their mistake, but said, "tough shit, you are too late to argue" and the headlines read "Umpires Kicked Call Costs Team Shot At Championship"?

I understand what the rules state, as does Steve. Yes it is a tough decision, but it is based on irrefutable facts based on what the teams actually did on the field, not on some award or presumed advance based on a judgment of what may or may not have happened.

You seem to be focused on the "jeopardy" part of this or something. It was a misinterpretation of the definition of a force out that needs to be corrected... but corrected properly.

No, the jeopardy is coming from the rule you are promoting as the cause for not making the correction.

And, don't give me the "always give 110%" speech. If a team is down by a run in the late innings, they will take greater risks. For example, runner on 3rd, attempt a squeeze play. If the scored is tied, they will not necessarily attempt such a risky play. I shouldn't have to tell you this.

Actually, I would never change my philosophy. You use the plays the players are capable of making regardless of the situation. If you have a combination capable of executing a squeeze play, I would use it if it gave me better odds of scoring a run. Don't care what the score is. I'm a firm believer in hitting the opponent until the referee tells you to stop. I believe the same is true in all sports. You don't want to be run-ruled or embarrassed, learn how to play better or change your scheduling priorities.

This was a protest situation that was not followed by the offended team. And, as I posted earlier, if the state league is not allowing protests, then there is no remedy for this at all.

If this can be corrected as it was, how long is too long? Later that evening? The next day? After the following game in the post season has been played?
If it can't be corrected 5 days later, where is your rule book now?

But is wasn't 5 days later. It was then and there on the field while the game was still in progress. This is why there should always be a UIC on site in championship play and instantly accessible the moment a coach uses the "P" word.

Of course, it should never come the this and the umpires should be embarrassed and have probably lost a fair amount of integrity over this. But when it does, there needs to be some common sense and that is why the UIC gets the big bucks.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

But those options were not permitted.

Exactly.

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Would you be so forgiving if the umpires refused to allow the run acknowledging their mistake, but said, "tough shit, you are too late to argue" and the headlines read "Umpires Kicked Call Costs Team Shot At Championship"?

I'm not being forgiving. In fact, almost the opposite. The state league took away the protest. Therefore, they took away the opportunity to correct this mistake. The umpires applied the "force out run scores" rule to a live ball appeal. This mistake is hardly rare among coaches, fans, scorekeepers, but the umpires SHOULD be embarrassed.

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I understand what the rules state, as does Steve.

That's a given.

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Yes it is a tough decision, but it is based on irrefutable facts based on what the teams actually did on the field, not on some award or presumed advance based on a judgment of what may or may not have happened.

And, what they did NOT do on the field... file a protest.

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

No, the jeopardy is coming from the rule you are promoting as the cause for not making the correction.

I'm not talking about jeopardy, I'm talking about a misinterpretation of a rule and the procedures and limitations the rule book places on the offended team to get remedy.

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Actually, I would never change my philosophy. You use the plays the players are capable of making regardless of the situation. If you have a combination capable of executing a squeeze play, I would use it if it gave me better odds of scoring a run. Don't care what the score is. I'm a firm believer in hitting the opponent until the referee tells you to stop. I believe the same is true in all sports. You don't want to be run-ruled or embarrassed, learn how to play better or change your scheduling priorities.

You seem to have the situation reversed. If the rule had been applied correctly at the time, the visiting team would have found themselves down by one run in the late innings. Taking additional risks on low-odds plays is a valid choice and is not the same thing at all as "hitting the opponent until the referee tells you to stop."

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

But is wasn't 5 days later. It was then and there on the field while the game was still in progress.

But, it was after the time when a protest could have been filed by rule, and that is what the team did... they came out on the field with their rule book and filed a protest. The umpires did not suddenly have an epiphany and correct their error... the team file a protest after it was too late to file a protest.

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

This is why there should always be a UIC on site in championship play and instantly accessible the moment a coach uses the "P" word.

We agree here. I do understand the logistical nightmare of having to handle in-season protests at the state level a day or two later, and then having to schedule a time to replay the game, but instant protest handling could easily be done in the post season. There is no reason this cannot be done. Yeah, they would have to pay the UIC to be present. Maybe in Delaware the UICs demand too much money!

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Of course, it should never come the this and the umpires should be embarrassed and have probably lost a fair amount of integrity over this. But when it does, there needs to be some common sense and that is why the UIC gets the big bucks.

Again, agree, but the UIC needs to be on-site to handle protest properly.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Leaving that aside (appeal v protest), he does validate my view that this is not a mere scorekeeping error. It is an erroneous ruling by the umpires, and cannot be corrected unless it is done within the time allowed or follows proper protest procedure if corrected later (replay from the point of the overruled ruling).

I've read both Steve's and Mike's responses, but remain unconvinced (no disrespect intended).

And, neither am I convinced by an argument around ad hocing things since protests are not allowed by the state high school association. If protests are not allowed, they are not allowed, which means everyone must live with the incorrect ruling.

Tom, I've "known" you for years on this and other messageboards. No disrespect was read into you remaining unconvinced. There, frankly, isn't any clearly right answer.

At the worst, absent anything absolutely definitive, I would go back to our purpose in being there; to make the game follow the rules intended to promote a fairness and equity into the game. Arbitrarily refusing to score a run that has scored under the rules is simply not why we are there.

The following is certainly a hyperbolic extension, but, just suppose:

During a game, the umpire tells the scorekeeper to change the score; to ANYTHING other than the correct score. Let's say he subtracts two runs from one team because he didn't like the conversations he had with their head coach. The umpire demands that the new score be posted, despite the absence of any rule support, or support of either scorebook (obviously).

In this league, the rule is "no protests allowed". The scorekeeper believes the umpire has that authority, and changes the score.

So my question is, is the real score the score of the game, or what the umpire says it is? There is no obvious procedure to change it back; or should the "league" just do what's right?

[youngump]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

The following is certainly a hyperbolic extension, but, just suppose:

During a game, the umpire tells the scorekeeper to change the score; to ANYTHING other than the correct score. Let's say he subtracts two runs from one team because he didn't like the conversations he had with their head coach. The umpire demands that the new score be posted, despite the absence of any rule support, or support of either scorebook (obviously).

In this league, the rule is "no protests allowed". The scorekeeper believes the umpire has that authority, and changes the score.

So my question is, is the real score the score of the game, or what the umpire says it is? There is no obvious procedure to change it back; or should the "league" just do what's right?

I like your hypothetical but it brings up the same two problems.

First as it effects the rest of the game: Let's say that it's now 0-2 instead of 2-2 and it's the bottom of the seventh. Should the 2 run coach bring in his outfield since a long fly scores the winning run or play back and trade and out for a run? Or for that matter. Suppose it's 2-1 instead of 2-3. And the home team doesn't even get to play the bottom half of the seventh because the umpire changed the score.

And second, it's somewhat tangential to your hypothetical that it was a scoring error instead of a rules error. If instead of deciding to take two runs away from the team because he's upset with the coach, he directs the first two batters of the inning to take 4 base awards before he throws the pitcher the ball. They have now legally scored and the runs count. If I understand you correctly, this a clear misapplication of the rules is not a scoring error and they are stuck with the crazy result. But it's just as problematic in my mind as the one they can fix. [That said, I can certainly see a case for fixing the first and not the second along the lines ruled here.]