double base discussion

[MD Longhorn]

Terminology is important.

BR (in all of those rules you quote) means Batter-Runner. Period.

In the original play you posted, you don't have a batter-runner. You have a runner. None of the parts of the rule that mention a BR are relevant to a runner.

Looked at that way, the rule is clear, and is in the right place in the rulebook.

[Tru_in_Blu]

I'll agree that it belongs in Section 8.

It does NOT belong in the section about when a BR is out.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on that point.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

I'll agree that it belongs in Section 8.

It does NOT belong in the section about when a BR is out.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on that point.

Why do you think it doesn't belong in the section about when a BR is out...

BR is the only one that can be out for touching the wrong half of the base. It cannot be in the section about when a RUNNER is out because a runner cannot be called out for touching the wrong half of the base (which, incidentally, is how you explain it to the coach, and when he trots out rule 8.2 and you point out to him that ENTIRE SECTION is about the batter-runner, and the player he's complaining about is a runner... the discussion is over).

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Why do you think it doesn't belong in the section about when a BR is out...

BR is the only one that can be out for touching the wrong half of the base. It cannot be in the section about when a RUNNER is out because a runner cannot be called out for touching the wrong half of the base (which, incidentally, is how you explain it to the coach, and when he trots out rule 8.2 and you point out to him that ENTIRE SECTION is about the batter-runner, and the player he's complaining about is a runner... the discussion is over).

What about the red part of the OP?

[Tru_in_Blu]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Why do you think it doesn't belong in the section about when a BR is out...

BR is the only one that can be out for touching the wrong half of the base. It cannot be in the section about when a RUNNER is out because a runner cannot be called out for touching the wrong half of the base (which, incidentally, is how you explain it to the coach, and when he trots out rule 8.2 and you point out to him that ENTIRE SECTION is about the batter-runner, and the player he's complaining about is a runner... the discussion is over).

It doesn't belong in the section because it doesn't follow the protocol for when a BR would be out. The first 2 sub-bullets are describing when a batted ball is fair or foul. What does THAT have to do with when a BR is out?

The issue was not about a runner touching whatever base, it was about the defense allegedly using the wrong base.

It doesn't belong because when tagging up on a fly ball, the runner can use either portion of the bag.

It doesn't belong because on an attempted pickoff the RUNNER may return to the white or colored portion of the base. What does THAT have to do with when a BR is out?

So it shouldn't be in the section about when the BR is out; it shouldn't be in the section about when the runner is out; it shouldn't be in the section about when the runner is not out.

It's a mish-mash of fair/foul, BR requirements and exceptions, and runner and defender allowances.

It belongs by itself as a stand alone entity somewhere in Rule 8.

[MD Longhorn]

I guess I would agree with you both a bit... the sections in red are not necessary AT ALL. I'm sure someone somewhere decided it needed to be clarified that a section of the book dedicated to when a BR is out doesn't apply to a runner. Whoever had that inserted was wrong. I would not have that part (tagging up ... or the pick off part either) in the book at all - but if it has to be there, you're right that it belongs elsewhere.

I would also agree that the heading part (M, before the subheadings) is worded very poorly if it's meant to follow the heading part of 8.2.

[Dakota]

Recall that several years ago, the "orange" base essentially disappeared (became part of foul ground) once the BR reached 1B.

When ASA decided to change the double base rule to make it one big base once the BR has reached 1B, the editors of the book got things a bit muddled.

But, the only time orange/white makes any difference is when a play is being made on the BR at 1B.

Otherwise, it is just one big base.

Can this be proven in the book? Maybe not, but it is the interpretation.

[Rich Ives]

The proper way to deal with a double base is to use the NCAA method.