Home run, fake throw, passing

[chalen 5]

R1, two outs. Any rule set. Batter hits a home run just beyond the reach of a leaping F8. R1, thinking the ball may have been caught, freezes halfway to 2B. F8 pretends to remove the ball from his glove and throw to 1B. R1, seeing this, retreats toward 1B, and the batter-runner passes R1.

Is the batter-runner out? If so, can R1 still score?

[grayhawk 3,372]

R1, two outs. Any rule set. Batter hits a home run just beyond the reach of a leaping F8. R1, thinking the ball may have been caught, freezes halfway to 2B. F8 pretends to remove the ball from his glove and throw to 1B. R1, seeing this, retreats toward 1B, and the batter-runner passes R1.
Is the batter-runner out? If so, can R1 still score?

BR is out for passing and it’s s time play so no runs score in your scenario.

[noumpere 2,744]

And, no -- it's not OBS (as I once had a coach try to tell me)

[chalen 5]

Supposedly in NFHS, R1 can still score, after the third out is recorded, according to https://www.closecallsports.com/2016/05/losing-home-run-runner-passing-case.html. In OBR and NCAA, it's a timing play.

[maven 4,295]

7 minutes ago, chalen said:

Supposedly in NFHS, R1 can still score, after the third out is recorded, according to https://www.closecallsports.com/2016/05/losing-home-run-runner-passing-case.html. In OBR and NCAA, it's a timing play.

I would disagree with that rules difference as of 2018.

The basis for ruling so, as Gil's case notes, is that (formerly) awarded bases "trumped" time plays. When FED deleted that case play for 2018, they eliminated the basis for such rulings. Accordingly, I would infer (which is sometimes the best we can do) that FED wants alignment with other codes in this time play as in others.

This post is regrettably vague, as I have no books or other stuff with me at the moment. Others are free to fill in the details (the deleted case about awarded bases and time plays, for example).

[Rich Ives 1,026]

9 hours ago, chalen said:

R1, two outs. Any rule set. Batter hits a home run just beyond the reach of a leaping F8. R1, thinking the ball may have been caught, freezes halfway to 2B. F8 pretends to remove the ball from his glove and throw to 1B. R1, seeing this, retreats toward 1B, and the batter-runner passes R1.

Is the batter-runner out? If so, can R1 still score?

Why would R1 freeze with two outs?

And if he thought the ball was caught that would be three outs and there would be no retreat.

 

[scrounge 1,215]

29 minutes ago, Rich Ives said:

Why would R1 freeze with two outs?

And if he thought the ball was caught that would be three outs and there would be no retreat.

 

Because kids space out all the time, and you know that. I've seen it twice just this week in varsity games, a runner freezes watching the ball while his 3B coach is losing it from yelling so much "THERE'S TWO OUTS, RUN!!!!". Neither time did the B/R get close to passing since both runners were on 2nd to start, but it's hardly out of the realm of possibility for this scenario to occur.

[Tborze 52]

2 hours ago, maven said:

I would disagree with that rules difference as of 2018.

The basis for ruling so, as Gil's case notes, is that (formerly) awarded bases "trumped" time plays. When FED deleted that case play for 2018, they eliminated the basis for such rulings. Accordingly, I would infer (which is sometimes the best we can do) that FED wants alignment with other codes in this time play as in others.

This post is regrettably vague, as I have no books or other stuff with me at the moment. Others are free to fill in the details (the deleted case about awarded bases and time plays, for example).

This one?

9.1.1 SITUATION M: With R1 at second base and R2 at first base and two outs, B5 hits a home run out of the park. While running the bases, B5 (a) passes R2 at first.

RULING: B5 is declared out. R1 and R2 will be awarded home and allowed to score due to the award from the home run. B5's out is not a "force out" so the other runs will count.

[Jimurray 699]

2 hours ago, maven said:

I would disagree with that rules difference as of 2018.

The basis for ruling so, as Gil's case notes, is that (formerly) awarded bases "trumped" time plays. When FED deleted that case play for 2018, they eliminated the basis for such rulings. Accordingly, I would infer (which is sometimes the best we can do) that FED wants alignment with other codes in this time play as in others.

This post is regrettably vague, as I have no books or other stuff with me at the moment. Others are free to fill in the details (the deleted case about awarded bases and time plays, for example).

Wouldn't @lawump's communication with FED confirm this except for Pennsylvania?

[umpstu 963]

1 hour ago, Rich Ives said:

Why would R1 freeze with two outs?

And if he thought the ball was caught that would be three outs and there would be no retreat.

 

Just poor coaching as usual.

[Rich Ives 1,026]

1 hour ago, scrounge said:

Because kids space out all the time, and you know that. I've seen it twice just this week in varsity games, a runner freezes watching the ball while his 3B coach is losing it from yelling so much "THERE'S TWO OUTS, RUN!!!!". Neither time did the B/R get close to passing since both runners were on 2nd to start, but it's hardly out of the realm of possibility for this scenario to occur.

I've had therm freeze. They get going again because I just yell "run" instead of all that other stuff.  Don't ever remember one retreating in this situation. And we always remind them that there are "two outs - run when it's hit" before the pitch. If the scene happens it's on the coach. 

[noumpere 2,744]

5 hours ago, Tborze said:

This one?

9.1.1 SITUATION M: With R1 at second base and R2 at first base and two outs, B5 hits a home run out of the park. While running the bases, B5 (a) passes R2 at first.

RULING: B5 is declared out. R1 and R2 will be awarded home and allowed to score due to the award from the home run. B5's out is not a "force out" so the other runs will count.

That's, I think, the 2017 (and earlier) case / ruling.  You can tell because R1 is at second and R2 is at first.  That nomenclature was changed for 2018.

 

I think (I've retired so I don't have the books), based on what I've read, that the case was changed (or removed) so no runs count

[Richvee 2,053]

19 hours ago, noumpere said:

That's, I think, the 2017 (and earlier) case / ruling.  You can tell because R1 is at second and R2 is at first.  That nomenclature was changed for 2018.

 

I think (I've retired so I don't have the books), based on what I've read, that the case was changed (or removed) so no runs count

It has indeed been removed from the 18 case book

[Kevin_K 657]

 

Pay no attention to this post.

[BT_Blue 1,274]

4 hours ago, Kevin_K said:

 

Pay no attention to this post.

 

[ricka56 1,138]

On 4/14/2018 at 4:32 PM, noumpere said:

I think (I've retired so I don't have the books) ...

Too late to get assigned as your partner?!? .... drat

[beerguy55 370]

On 4/14/2018 at 6:12 AM, noumpere said:

And, no -- it's not OBS (as I once had a coach try to tell me)

Much like the Chuck Knoblauch decoy on Lonnie Smith in the World Series.

Nor would the opposite be OBS - ie. catching the ball but pretending it went over the fence to entice R1 to continue and not tag up.