Jump to content

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member
maven

End of game situation

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Sut'n Blue said:

Jump to near the end oft he clip:

 

 

Wait so did this rule change? Because according to the current rule the BR should be out, right? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member

So, once the ball is dead you can't be called out for passing a runner?   I thought this didn't matter.  Shouldn't the batter be out here, regardless of before or after the dead ball?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

If it's dead because of a HR he can be called out. Otherwise, if CCS has it correct from the horse's mouth, he cannot be called out: http://www.closecallsports.com/2016/09/case-play-2016-11-time-to-pass-runner.html#disqus_thread

 

So MLB's contention is passing a runner during a HR is a time play, but passing a runner on a ground rule double after the ball clears the fence is nothing? Because time is called when a ball bounces over the fence, but not on a HR?

So in a nutshell, MLB is saying the play is not over on a HR until the baserunners complete their baserunning obligations, whereas on a ball thrown out of play, or GR double, the ball is dead immediately, so passing cannot occur after the ball leaves the playing field?  

Strange...but as strange as it is, I understand the logic. 

Now I have more questions on how FED wants passing rules enforced on these different types of dead ball baserunning awards. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Richvee said:

So MLB's contention is passing a runner during a HR is a time play, but passing a runner on a ground rule double after the ball clears the fence is nothing? Because time is called when a ball bounces over the fence, but not on a HR?

So in a nutshell, MLB is saying the play is not over on a HR until the baserunners complete their baserunning obligations, whereas on a ball thrown out of play, or GR double, the ball is dead immediately, so passing cannot occur after the ball leaves the playing field?  

Strange...but as strange as it is, I understand the logic. 

Now I have more questions on how FED wants passing rules enforced on these different types of dead ball baserunning awards. 

Hold on guys. 2017 MLBUM page 69

6.19 PASSING A PRECEDING RUNNER 

(relevant portion) Runners passing are not protected from being called out in accordance with Rule 5.09(b)(9) by time being called or other dead ball situation (e.g., ground rule double, home run) if they are still in the act of running the bases. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Stk004 said:

Hold on guys. 2017 MLBUM page 69

6.19 PASSING A PRECEDING RUNNER 

(relevant portion) Runners passing are not protected from being called out in accordance with Rule 5.09(b)(9) by time being called or other dead ball situation (e.g., ground rule double, home run) if they are still in the act of running the bases. 

So in the above clip, they simply got it wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Richvee said:

So in the above clip, they simply got it wrong?

Culbreath is not known for rules knowledge. But maybe MLB firmed up this gray area in 2017. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Richvee said:

So in the above clip, they simply got it wrong?

That's why I asked if the rule had been changed. They reviewed the play in question so clearly New York approved the ruling at the time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

But maybe MLB formed up this gray area in 2017

Possible...I don't see this in my 2015 MLBUM....Time for upgrades to my library.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Richvee said:

Possible...I don't see this in my 2015 MLBUM....Time for upgrades to my library.

For what it's worth the dead ball clarification was included in the changes for the 2017 manual, so I'm not sure if it was simply an approved ruling or if something was actually added/changed in the rule book. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Stk004 said:

For what it's worth the dead ball clarification was included in the changes for the 2017 manual, so I'm not sure if it was simply an approved ruling or if something was actually added/changed in the rule book. 

It looks like just a clarification in the manual in 2017 due to this play.  Basically saying 7.01(g) approved ruling applies to all dead ball baserunning awards. The rule itself remained unchanged..

7.01(g) approved ruling...

APPROVED RULING: The batter hits a home run out
of the playing field to win the game in the last half of
the ninth or an extra inning, but is called out for passing
a preceding runner. The game ends immediately
when the winning run is scored, unless there are two
out and the winning run has not yet reached home
plate when the runner passes another, in which case
the inning is over and only those runs that scored
before the runner passes another shall count.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Richvee said:

So in the above clip, they simply got it wrong?

If you're talking about the 2016 CCS case study, I find their article contradictory. The seem to say that no outs can be made when the ball is dead, but also contradicted their opinion "when Marlins batter JT Realmuto passed baserunner Marcell Ozuna during an apparent home run" and was called out "without regard to the timing relative to live/dead ball" which would be supported by the MLBUM reference below

5 hours ago, Stk004 said:

6.19 PASSING A PRECEDING RUNNER 

(relevant portion) Runners passing are not protected from being called out in accordance with Rule 5.09(b)(9) by time being called or other dead ball situation (e.g., ground rule double, home run) if they are still in the act of running the bases. 

To be fair the CCS article was written and 2016 and the MLBUM reference in 2017. Maybe the 2016 CCS was correctly ruled in 2016, but not so now. 

IMO, differentiating whether the passing preceding runner rule is applicable based on whether the dead ball occurred because of a HR or a GRD doesn't make any sense to me.

I look forward to knowing whether Fed has become aligned with OBR/NCAA timing interp of the DB sitch (the significance of 9.1.1M deletion).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/20/2018 at 10:04 AM, maven said:

I saw it. 8.4.2L is not relevant to the case in the OP. It is a a straight live-ball time play.

The problem posed by my play is the conflict between calling this a time play, which shouldn't occur during a dead ball, and the dead-ball awards after a HR, which shouldn't count after the 3rd out.

I have no objection to FED going with the other option for this play, if that's what the deletion of 9.1.1M signals. There's no intrinsic reason why either option is better (pretend it's a live ball and treat as a time play, or pretend the awarded bases count after the 3rd out is recorded). Consistency with the other codes is as good a reason as any for picking one.

Perhaps a new case play will appear in the 2018 Interps.

Well I'm not expert but scoring the run under FED rules seems intuitive to me. As you point out the ball is dead so a timing play doesn't make sense. The only thing I see in the rules/case book regarding dead ball has to do with force outs/not reaching first. That doesn't apply here. The base award table entitles each runner and the BR to four bases for a "fair batted ball over fence." So the BR is out but the other runners are by rule entitled to their four bases. The BR reached first and no runner was forced out. Done deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mwest5575 said:

Well I'm not expert but scoring the run under FED rules seems intuitive to me. As you point out the ball is dead so a timing play doesn't make sense. The only thing I see in the rules/case book regarding dead ball has to do with force outs/not reaching first. That doesn't apply here. The base award table entitles each runner and the BR to four bases for a "fair batted ball over fence." So the BR is out but the other runners are by rule entitled to their four bases. The BR reached first and no runner was forced out. Done deal.

Yes, that's the rationale for the other option and for the (now deleted) case play. Opting for that interpretation put FED at odds with the other codes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, maven said:

Yes, that's the rationale for the other option and for the (now deleted) case play. Opting for that interpretation put FED at odds with the other codes.

Even with that case play deleted I still think (atleast with the wording in FED rule book...I'm not as familiar with OBR/NCAA) that the runs should score. Runners are entitled to their four bases, and the only thing that I can find that would seem applicable is the force out/not reaching first issue. Especially since each individual runner is entitled to four bases and are not being "pushed" around the bases by the BR or anyone else for that matter. Since the rule says that each runner is entitled to move four bases, I don't see anything that should prevent every runner who legally touches each base to score. Introducing some level of timing into the play (I guess that is what the MLB reasoning is) seems like a stretch to me. FED seems much more reasonable. (And I don't find myself saying that very often!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, mwest5575 said:

Even with that case play deleted I still think (atleast with the wording in FED rule book...I'm not as familiar with OBR/NCAA) that the runs should score. Runners are entitled to their four bases, and the only thing that I can find that would seem applicable is the force out/not reaching first issue. Especially since each individual runner is entitled to four bases and are not being "pushed" around the bases by the BR or anyone else for that matter. Since the rule says that each runner is entitled to move four bases, I don't see anything that should prevent every runner who legally touches each base to score. Introducing some level of timing into the play (I guess that is what the MLB reasoning is) seems like a stretch to me. FED seems much more reasonable. (And I don't find myself saying that very often!)

The MLB/NCAA philosophy makes more sense to me than the murky/now-deleted/who knows FED one in that, to me, based on the definitions, those runners are not actually entitled to those bases but merely entitled to the right to advance without a play. If these knuckleheads are so stupid that they can't legally advance before making the third out - well, stupidity should have a price.

I'm fine with them clarifying that awarded bases shall be completed - but it seems to me go against the general rule 9 timing play provision of no run scoring after the 3rd out or the definition of what an award is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, scrounge said:

I'm fine with them clarifying that awarded bases shall be completed - but it seems to me go against the general rule 9 timing play provision of no run scoring after the 3rd out or the definition of what an award is.

And there it is, the basis for the other interpretation! We've come full circle.

I'm fine with the new FED interpretation, as it employs a "baseball fundamental," namely that baseball is a game of defense. Baseball is better when the "under" bets pay. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, maven said:

And there it is, the basis for the other interpretation! We've come full circle.

I'm fine with the new FED interpretation, as it employs a "baseball fundamental," namely that baseball is a game of defense. Baseball is better when the "under" bets pay. ;)

We won't know what the interp is until @lawump provides it. The 2018 interps are of no help: https://nfhs.org/sports-resource-content/baseball-rules-interpretations-2018/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we know. FED keeps outdated interps in the book for years by accident. When they delete a case, it's on purpose.

Also, a state interpreter told me so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was told by our state interpreter that the ruling did not change and was unsure why 9.1.1m was deleted from the CB. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, maven said:

I think we know. FED keeps outdated interps in the book for years by accident. When they delete a case, it's on purpose.

Also, a state interpreter told me so.

 

3 minutes ago, Tborze said:

I was told by our state interpreter that the ruling did not change and was unsure why 9.1.1m was deleted from the CB. 

Which is why this quote, or something like it,from the late Carl Childress is appropriate." I hope this play does not happen to you." 

And the odds are with us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, mwest5575 said:

Even with that case play deleted I still think (atleast with the wording in FED rule book...I'm not as familiar with OBR/NCAA) that the runs should score. Runners are entitled to their four bases,

An "award" just means the defense can't put the runners out.  It doesn't mean the runners can't be declared out by the umpires for a base running violation.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The link to the other thread seems to have been deleted. 

Just received this bulletin.  

Interesting Plays

PLAY: Bases loaded, with two outs. The ba er hits a home run, but R1 (on rst base) can’t nd the ball o the bat. The B/R runs hard out of the box, touches rst base, and then passes R1 who is s ll standing near rst base. Everyone agrees that the B/R passing R1 cons tutes the third out of the inning. Furthermore, eve- ryone agrees that this is not a force out, nor an out against the B/R before he reached rst base. Here is the issue: Some people argue that the other runners (R1, R2, R3) are allowed to score under the theory that the home run is a dead ball award. Others argue that this is a “ ming play” with regard to determining if the run scores or not. Which is it?

RULING: The NFHS is currently in the process of reviewing the play, but by all current rules, 3 runs score (every runner except the ba er):

  1. 2018 NFHS Baseball Rule 9-1-1 (a through e).

  2. 2018 NFHS Case Book Play 9.1.1 Situa on K.

  3. 2018 High School Baseball Rules By Topic Pages 145-148

  4. NFHS Baseball Rules Interpretations 2006 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Tborze said:

The link to the other thread seems to have been deleted. 

Just received this bulletin.  

Interesting Plays

PLAY: Bases loaded, with two outs. The ba er hits a home run, but R1 (on rst base) can’t nd the ball o the bat. The B/R runs hard out of the box, touches rst base, and then passes R1 who is s ll standing near rst base. Everyone agrees that the B/R passing R1 cons tutes the third out of the inning. Furthermore, eve- ryone agrees that this is not a force out, nor an out against the B/R before he reached rst base. Here is the issue: Some people argue that the other runners (R1, R2, R3) are allowed to score under the theory that the home run is a dead ball award. Others argue that this is a “ ming play” with regard to determining if the run scores or not. Which is it?

RULING: The NFHS is currently in the process of reviewing the play, but by all current rules, 3 runs score (every runner except the ba er):

  1. 2018 NFHS Baseball Rule 9-1-1 (a through e).

  2. 2018 NFHS Case Book Play 9.1.1 Situa on K.

  3. 2018 High School Baseball Rules By Topic Pages 145-148

  4. NFHS Baseball Rules Interpretations 2006 

Grasping at straws. 9-1-1 first paragraph would not score the run. The a. thru e. exceptions are not inclusive. 

9.1.1k does not apply as it does not have passing as the third out. 

Possibly Referee personnel were involved in publishing rules by topic and they do not want to be proven wrong?  But they were right until this year as the 2006 interp shows. 

Does whoever issued that bulletin understand that FED changed and is now in concert with OBR regarding passing during a HR?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×