Batter-Runner retreating toward home plate

[VolUmp]

Neither in OBR nor FED can I find a rule that declares that the batter-runner may retreat toward home plate so long as he doesn't touch it.  This typically happens on a bunt when he's trying to stretch the play to keep another runner from being thrown out after he's finally tagged.

Any rule refs would be appreciated.  I've used searches for the word retreat, return, back up, to no avail.

 

EDIT: Found a FED Case Play using the word "reverse."

CB 8.1.1 A

Would still appreciate a rule ref in OBR.

[Senor Azul]

That point is not covered in the OBR. You have to go to an Official Interpretation that can be found in the PBUC and can also be found in the BRD. 

From the 2014 edition of the PBUC (p. 84):

In situations where the batter-runner gets into a rundown between first and home, if the batter-runner retreats and reaches home plate, he shall be declared out.

The same interpretation applies in Fed and can be found in the case book at 8.1.1 Situation A.

You can also find the interpretations in Carl Childress' BRD (section 117, p. 93 in the 2016 edition) under the heading:

Batter-Runner:  Retreats Toward Plate to Avoid Tag

[Jimurray]

44 minutes ago, VolUmp said:

Neither in OBR nor FED can I find a rule that declares that the batter-runner may retreat toward home plate so long as he doesn't touch it.  This typically happens on a bunt when he's trying to stretch the play to keep another runner from being thrown out after he's finally tagged.

Any rule refs would be appreciated.  I've used searches for the word retreat, return, back up, to no avail.

 

EDIT: Found a FED Case Play using the word "reverse."

CB 8.1.1 A

Would still appreciate a rule ref in OBR.

Why would you need a rule ref regarding retreating, that can be done between any base in baseball. Now, touching HP while retreating, that would require a cite

[VolUmp]

2 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

Why would you need a rule ref regarding retreating, that can be done between any base in baseball. Now, touching HP while retreating, that would require a cite

And Jim ... if you re-read the OP you'll see that's precisely what I asked.

[maven]

56 minutes ago, VolUmp said:

Neither in OBR nor FED can I find a rule that declares that the batter-runner may retreat toward home plate so long as he doesn't touch it.

Rules don't generally permit, they generally prohibit. So you shouldn't expect a rule permitting the BR to retreat.

Because no rule prohibits the BR from retreating, he's permitted to do so.

By interpretation, he may retreat only as far as HP, at which point he would be out. This is consistent with the scoring rule that states that runners advance and touch each base in order: though retreating is sometimes allowed and often required, runners may not retreat behind the base where they started. And the batter-runner kinda sorta started at HP.

[VolUmp]

2 minutes ago, maven said:

Rules don't generally permit, they generally prohibit. So you shouldn't expect a rule permitting the BR to retreat.

Because no rule prohibits the BR from retreating, he's permitted to do so.

By interpretation, he may retreat only as far as HP, at which point he would be out. This is consistent with the scoring rule that states that runners advance and touch each base in order: though retreating is sometimes allowed and often required, runners may not retreat behind the base where they started. And the batter-runner kinda sorta started at HP.

Thanks, Maven.

There are, as you know, many many myths out there ... and one of them is, "You can't retreat toward home plate."

I have no idea where it came from, but I had a partner call it this summer and I had to intervene and fix it.

My completed sentence in the OP ends with, "retreat toward home plate so long as he doesn't touch it."

I don't think that was a foolhardy question ... I know the rule ... I want the rule ref.  I now know there is none ... at least in OBR.

I'm sure the FED Casebook includes this because of so many coaches and umps kicking this call.

[Jimurray]

4 minutes ago, VolUmp said:

And Jim ... if you re-read the OP you'll see that's precisely what I asked.

And that's precisely what I missed. So given the interps in baseball, leaving out the SB interps and some FED  committee members attempts to impose the SB rule, how do the rule makers come up with this interp? Obviously, SB is screwed up in that a rundown at any other base can go both ways. So in BB why not let the runner be safe at HP? Its a base right? Or continue arround the horn to 3B? No need to answer my questions. I'm happy with the BB interp. But I do wonder about the SB and some FED BB mindsets that do not like a batter-runner to retreat on the 1B line.

[Jimurray]

8 minutes ago, maven said:

Rules don't generally permit, they generally prohibit. So you shouldn't expect a rule permitting the BR to retreat.

Because no rule prohibits the BR from retreating, he's permitted to do so.

By interpretation, he may retreat only as far as HP, at which point he would be out. This is consistent with the scoring rule that states that runners advance and touch each base in order: though retreating is sometimes allowed and often required, runners may not retreat behind the base where they started. And the batter-runner kinda sorta started at HP.

Yes but why wouldn't he be safe at HP or at least be out after passing it in reverse?

[Stk004]

Is there anything in the MLBUM about a runner being out for retreating past the base he started on? 

[maven]

8 hours ago, Jimurray said:

Yes but why wouldn't he be safe at HP or at least be out after passing it in reverse?

Because, unlike other runners, the BR doesn't "start from" a base?

Trivia question: which is the only base no runner may legally occupy?

 

[noumpere]

1 hour ago, maven said:

Because, unlike other runners, the BR doesn't "start from" a base?

Trivia question: which is the only base no runner may legally occupy?

 

Fifth base?

[grayhawk]

11 hours ago, VolUmp said:

 

There are, as you know, many many myths out there ... and one of them is, "You can't retreat toward home plate."

I have no idea where it came from, but I had a partner call it this summer and I had to intervene and fix it.

 

It's probably perpetuated by umpires that work both baseball and softball.  The softball rule states that the BR is out for merely retreating towards the plate, so I would bet that there are many softball umpires out there that have enforced it that way in baseball games.

[VolUmp]

Reason number 472 why I hate ... (never mind ... )

[Rich Ives]

41 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

It's probably perpetuated by umpires that work both baseball and softball.  The softball rule states that the BR is out for merely retreating towards the plate, so I would bet that there are many softball umpires out there that have enforced it that way in baseball games.

Softball says "to avoid a tag". That part gets overlooked in softball too.

[lawump]

14 hours ago, Jimurray said:

some FED  committee members attempts to impose the SB rule,

Are you referring to members of the baseball committee?  I've only been on the committee for one year, but I've looked at previous years' proposals.  I've yet to see this proposal in baseball.

As for the OP: I actually had this happen in a Div.1 game (Navy at College of Charleston).  R1, R2, 0 outs.  Bunt that a charging F3 fielded in front of the 45-foot line.  The B/R stopped and started backing up allowing R1 & R2 to cruise into their advance base.  Navy coach came out to discuss. He asked (to paraphrase) "I didn't think a batter could run backwards."  I was the first base umpire (3-man crew), my plate guy did a great job quickly informing him of the correct rule.  Shows that they don't even know the rule at the highest levels of amateur baseball.

[Jimurray]

1 hour ago, lawump said:

Are you referring to members of the baseball committee?  I've only been on the committee for one year, but I've looked at previous years' proposals.  I've yet to see this proposal in baseball.

As for the OP: I actually had this happen in a Div.1 game (Navy at College of Charleston).  R1, R2, 0 outs.  Bunt that a charging F3 fielded in front of the 45-foot line.  The B/R stopped and started backing up allowing R1 & R2 to cruise into their advance base.  Navy coach came out to discuss. He asked (to paraphrase) "I didn't think a batter could run backwards."  I was the first base umpire (3-man crew), my plate guy did a great job quickly informing him of the correct rule.  Shows that they don't even know the rule at the highest levels of amateur baseball.

This got voted (do they vote) down in 2012:

"22 8-4-1l (new) Modify:...l. After a fair batted or bunted ball he steps back toward home plate to avoid or delay a tag by a fielder. The batter-runner is out and the ball remains live.

Rationale: By not having a batter-runner retreat rule we allow the offense to have an advantage over the defense. The lack of the rule enables a batter-runner to run toward first base, stop, and then run backward toward home plate in order to create a near run-down situation, confusing the defensive players and prohibiting them from tagging the batter-runner and making a subsequent play on another advancing runner. I have no problem with a batter-runner stopping halfway up the line to allow a defender to tag him, but retreating to delay the inevitable gives the offense too much leeway. Jim Angele Nebraska"

[VolUmp]

36 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

I have no problem with a batter-runner stopping halfway up the line to allow a defender to tag him, but retreating to delay the inevitable gives the offense too much leeway. Jim Angele Nebraska"

How do you see the batter-runner being any different than any other runner?

R1, trying to delay a tag by F4 (and prevent a double play) can do the same thing if F4 attempts to tag him instead of throwing to 2nd base.

[scrounge]

1 hour ago, Jimurray said:

This got voted (do they vote) down in 2012:

"22 8-4-1l (new) Modify:...l. After a fair batted or bunted ball he steps back toward home plate to avoid or delay a tag by a fielder. The batter-runner is out and the ball remains live.

Rationale: By not having a batter-runner retreat rule we allow the offense to have an advantage over the defense. The lack of the rule enables a batter-runner to run toward first base, stop, and then run backward toward home plate in order to create a near run-down situation, confusing the defensive players and prohibiting them from tagging the batter-runner and making a subsequent play on another advancing runner. I have no problem with a batter-runner stopping halfway up the line to allow a defender to tag him, but retreating to delay the inevitable gives the offense too much leeway. Jim Angele Nebraska"

Ok...so? I get that this may offend Jim's personal sensibilities, but I see no problem for which this solution is vainly hunting.

[Jimurray]

39 minutes ago, VolUmp said:

How do you see the batter-runner being any different than any other runner?

R1, trying to delay a tag by F4 (and prevent a double play) can do the same thing if F4 attempts to tag him instead of throwing to 2nd base.

Are you asking this Jim or that Jim. That Jim is a coach from Nebraska. This Jim does not agree with that Jim

[Stk004]

1 minute ago, Jimurray said:

Are you asking this Jim or that Jim. That Jim is a coach from Nebraska. This Jim does not agree with that Jim

What's the fella's name on first base? 

[VolUmp]

2 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

Are you asking this Jim or that Jim. That Jim is a coach from Nebraska. This Jim does not agree with that Jim

Sorry ... that confused me.  Got it now.

[maven]

1 hour ago, Jimurray said:

This got voted (do they vote) down in 2012:

"22 8-4-1l (new) Modify:...l. After a fair batted or bunted ball he steps back toward home plate to avoid or delay a tag by a fielder. The batter-runner is out and the ball remains live.

Rationale: By not having a batter-runner retreat rule we allow the offense to have an advantage over the defense. The lack of the rule enables a batter-runner to run toward first base, stop, and then run backward toward home plate in order to create a near run-down situation, confusing the defensive players and prohibiting them from tagging the batter-runner and making a subsequent play on another advancing runner. I have no problem with a batter-runner stopping halfway up the line to allow a defender to tag him, but retreating to delay the inevitable gives the offense too much leeway. Jim Angele Nebraska"

This guy was communication director for NSAA and claims to have trained umpires. Sounds like someone who thought that baseball and softball should play by the same rules.

It also sounds as if he's never seen a defense botch a rundown, if he thinks it's "inevitable" that a runner will be put out. And even if it were inevitable, delay is precisely the tactic.

That's dumb.

[grayhawk]

This guy was communication director for NSAA and claims to have trained umpires. Sounds like someone who thought that baseball and softball should play by the same rules.

It also sounds as if he's never seen a defense botch a rundown, if he thinks it's "inevitable" that a runner will be put out. And even if it were inevitable, delay is precisely the tactic.

That's dumb.

Not to mention that this "rundown" is unique. They only need to throw to first to retire the BR. If the defense is too clueless to remember that, then that's on them.

[Mister B]

1 hour ago, grayhawk said:

Not to mention that this "rundown" is unique. They only need to throw to first to retire the BR. If the defense is too clueless to remember that, then that's on them.

I was thinking the same thing. What the BR is doing shouldn't concern anybody. Get the out at first. There's only one place the BR can go, and he's got to get there. 

[lawump]

8 hours ago, Jimurray said:

This got voted (do they vote) down in 2012:

"22 8-4-1l (new) Modify:...l. After a fair batted or bunted ball he steps back toward home plate to avoid or delay a tag by a fielder. The batter-runner is out and the ball remains live.

Rationale: By not having a batter-runner retreat rule we allow the offense to have an advantage over the defense. The lack of the rule enables a batter-runner to run toward first base, stop, and then run backward toward home plate in order to create a near run-down situation, confusing the defensive players and prohibiting them from tagging the batter-runner and making a subsequent play on another advancing runner. I have no problem with a batter-runner stopping halfway up the line to allow a defender to tag him, but retreating to delay the inevitable gives the offense too much leeway. Jim Angele Nebraska"

Clearly I didn't see that!  LOL. Glad it got voted down.