Jump to content

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member
  • 0
Sign in to follow this  
Guest rock

does run count

Question

Guest rock

2 outs runners on 2nd and 3rd...ball hit to 3rd,bobbled....runner on 3rd crosses plate but 3rd baseman tags runner on 2nd that is coming to 3rd before batter reaches 1st for final out...does run count? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

26 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

if the runner from 3rd crossed the plate prior to the runner from second being tagged out - yes the run counts - however, you do not address that happening in your post.

 

the batter-runner reaching first would only matter if the play was on the batter-runner, if he's put out prior to reaching first then the run would not count.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member
  • 0
9 minutes ago, stkjock said:

if the runner from 3rd crossed the plate prior to the runner from second being tagged out - yes the run counts - however, you do not address that happening in your post

Yep.  Left out the only facts that matter to the play

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

This reminds me of a question I thought of the other day - in this same situation, what if after tagging R2, F5 realizes he still has a play on the BR at first, which would have negated the run of he just made that play. If he then goes ahead and makes that play anyway, 5-3, is the BR 'out' and is the run therefore negated? I've heard of an advantageous 4th out but not sure if it applies here or only on appeal.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
12 minutes ago, isired said:

This reminds me of a question I thought of the other day - in this same situation, what if after tagging R2, F5 realizes he still has a play on the BR at first, which would have negated the run of he just made that play. If he then goes ahead and makes that play anyway, 5-3, is the BR 'out' and is the run therefore negated? I've heard of an advantageous 4th out but not sure if it applies here or only on appeal.

The FED rule actually says the THIRD OUT.  So under those rules the run would still score.  Id imagine it would be the same in all other rule sets.

The "fourth out" is usually a result of a base running infraction of some sort

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
The FED rule actually says the THIRD OUT.  So under those rules the run would still score.  Id imagine it would be the same in all other rule sets.
The "fourth out" is usually a result of a base running infraction of some sort
 
Thanks for the clarification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 hour ago, aaluck said:

The FED rule actually says the THIRD OUT.  So under those rules the run would still score.  Id imagine it would be the same in all other rule sets.

The "fourth out" is usually a result of a base running infraction of some sort

 

NCAA would allow the out at 1B to replace the third out. 2011 BRD says FED and OBR also would but I believe Wendelstedt says no currently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 hour ago, Jimurray said:

NCAA would allow the out at 1B to replace the third out. 2011 BRD says FED and OBR also would but I believe Wendelstedt says no currently.

Nobody should have a fourth out on the BR in this situation, and I'm surprised that NCAA allows it. An "apparent fourth out" is properly called only on appeal, specifically a retouch or missed base appeal.

If the defense wants to negate the run, they should play on the BR for the THIRD out prior to his touching 1B.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0



If the defense wants to negate the run, they should play on the BR for the THIRD out prior to his touching 1B.
That makes sense, with 2 outs the play is always at first there. This situation would only happen at the youngest levels, and there very seldom I would imagine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
3 hours ago, maven said:

Nobody should have a fourth out on the BR in this situation, and I'm surprised that NCAA allows it. An "apparent fourth out" is properly called only on appeal, specifically a retouch or missed base appeal.

If the defense wants to negate the run, they should play on the BR for the THIRD out prior to his touching 1B.

That’s what Wendelstedt says. But it appears FED and NCAA dissagree. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 hour ago, Jimurray said:

That’s what Wendelstedt says. But it appears FED and NCAA dissagree. 

NCAA I don't know. FED will catch up eventually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 6/8/2018 at 10:00 AM, aaluck said:

The FED rule actually says the THIRD OUT.  So under those rules the run would still score.  Id imagine it would be the same in all other rule sets.

The "fourth out" is usually a result of a base running infraction of some sort

 

There is no "fourth" out, ever.   The so called fourth out actually replaces the other out - effectively negates the play and changes the third out.   And that is how it is scored and recorded.

The score keeping rules, IMO, help explain this rule too.   As presented in the OP, the BR is ruled to have reached on a FC, and, counts as a LOB.  By that, again IMO, since the batter has reached safely, the run must score.  It explains, to me anyway, why the rule isn't "third out is retired before BR reaches first".   You still have to account for the BR, and if BR is LOB on first, the run must count (provided it scored before the third out was recorded on R2).

The interesting conundrum, again, it might be only interesting to me, is if BR never reached first base - returning to the dugout or going straight to his defensive position after the third out was acquired - would the defense be able to appeal to first to obtain the so called fourth out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0



The interesting conundrum, again, it might be only interesting to me, is if BR never reached first base - returning to the dugout or going straight to his defensive position after the third out was acquired - would the defense be able to appeal to first to obtain the so called fourth out?
That is interesting, and more in line with the more common 'advantageous 4th out' scenarios - appeal base running infractions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
17 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

The interesting conundrum, again, it might be only interesting to me, is if BR never reached first base - returning to the dugout or going straight to his defensive position after the third out was acquired - would the defense be able to appeal to first to obtain the so called fourth out?

That is interesting. I would assume (and you know what that does) that since it is scored as a "fielder's choice" for the third out it would be irrelevant whether or not he actually made it to the bag.  But I see your point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
29 minutes ago, isired said:


 

That is interesting, and more in line with the more common 'advantageous 4th out' scenarios - appeal base running infractions.

In 2001 all three codes allowed an advantageous fourth out for a slow, injured or oblivious batter-runner. This is what Carl Childress, RIP, said about that interp:

"Of all the interpretations I've encountered over the years, this is the most non-intuitive. We've always known the defense may gain an advantageous out by appealing a baserunning error. But who ever knew an out was available simply because the batter-runner was slow? I found it out in 2001. I hope it never happens in one of my games. Or yours!"

I believe OBR now would not allow that fourth out if the Wendelstedt School rules the interps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest NJ Coach

Maybe the reason for allowing the "4th out" to supercede the 3rd as in the above example is that umpires might not instantly call the tag out, giving the fielder no choice but to throw to first just in case ump believed the tag was missed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
16 hours ago, Guest NJ Coach said:

Maybe the reason for allowing the "4th out" to supercede the 3rd as in the above example is that umpires might not instantly call the tag out, giving the fielder no choice but to throw to first just in case ump believed the tag was missed.

That doesn't seem like a valid reason to me.  The out happens when the tag is made, not when the call is made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest NJ Coach

Sometimes tags aren't obvious, as runners try to avoid.  And calls aren't immediate.  My kid tagged a baserunner thinking third out, but no call was made...she got confused, not knowing what to do bc there was no call....so her throw to first was late.   Only then did the ump call the baserunner out on the tag 5-10 seconds before.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
6 minutes ago, Guest NJ Coach said:

Sometimes tags aren't obvious, as runners try to avoid.  And calls aren't immediate.  My kid tagged a baserunner thinking third out, but no call was made...she got confused, not knowing what to do bc there was no call....so her throw to first was late.   Only then did the ump call the baserunner out on the tag 5-10 seconds before.

 

Agreed.  Has nothing to do with the rule / interp on whether BR can be out for the "fourth out."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest NJ Coach

i thought we were debating why all rule sets allow the 4th out to supercede the  3rd ? what else could be the reason ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
47 minutes ago, Guest NJ Coach said:

i thought we were debating why all rule sets allow the 4th out to supersede the  3rd ? what else could be the reason ?

All rule sets allow a 4th out appeal to supersede the 3rd out when it would be advantageous (by discounting a run).

The reason for allowing it to do so is that an appeal generates an out when it is granted, not when the infraction occurred. That's going to be too late to negate a run in almost all cases, and the offense would benefit unfairly from their infraction.

I expect that this rule got some tweaking over the years, in order to maintain balance between offense and defense. The offense has a greater incentive to cheat on the bases when they're going to get runs even after getting caught.

A missed base appeal can be a 4th out when the runner missed the base to which he was forced. That out becomes a force play, which would negate a run (or runs).

A retouch appeal can be a 4th out when R3 fails to retouch and R1 or R2 scores behind him. No runner can score when a preceding runner makes the 3rd out.

Playing on a runner (including the BR) after 3 are out is not an appeal play, so no 4th out is possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
4 hours ago, Guest NJ Coach said:

i thought we were debating why all rule sets allow the 4th out to supercede the  3rd ? what else could be the reason ?

Runners on second and third - one out, shallow fly ball.  R3 leaves early by design...R2 then entices a throw to get himself out once run scores...three out, and no way to undo the run.  So, enter the rule to allow an appeal to negate the out of R2, and change it to an out of R3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Sorry to hijack this thread Beerguy's post ^ brought up a question for me. As an umpire, how do you handle this scenario as an appeal play? Typically after the "3rd out" DF would leave the field whilst the OF coach came out to argue that R3 left early so now you have the DF team in the dugout and the OF on the field. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
42 minutes ago, Jono said:

Sorry to hijack this thread Beerguy's post ^ brought up a question for me. As an umpire, how do you handle this scenario as an appeal play? Typically after the "3rd out" DF would leave the field whilst the OF coach came out to argue that R3 left early so now you have the DF team in the dugout and the OF on the field.

It would be odd for the OC to appeal his own runner's error, but whatever!

Handle it like any appeal: if the infielders have all left fair territory, their window for appealing has closed. (That's the FED window; IIRC OBR is the same.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
2 hours ago, maven said:

It would be odd for the OC to appeal his own runner's error, but whatever!

Handle it like any appeal: if the infielders have all left fair territory, their window for appealing has closed. (That's the FED window; IIRC OBR is the same.)

Sorry, meant the DC appealing to negate the run. Thanks maven, fist year umpiring and so much to learn but have found this place to be an absolute gold mine of information and help thank god.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×