beerguy55

Unless I'm very wrong, all softball codes at all levels allow dead ball appeals.

This question came up in another thread, but may have got lost in the other elements of the conversation. OBR Scenario 1 - R1 runs on a fly ball and rounds second base...OF then makes the catch and throws the ball, which goes out of play. The runner is awarded home. Scenario 2 - B/R hits deep, misses first, rounds second base, and then OF throws the ball, which goes out of play. The runner is awarded home. MLBUM rules the runner may correct their error, as long as they don't touch third base before doing so. In both scenarios, after the ball goes out of play, the runner properly retouches second and then first to correct their base running error. MLBUM specifically mentions Scenario 1, and rules that the award changes to third base. Does the award also "reset" to third base in Scenario 2, or does it remain home base?

I would not say it's anything "official" but more a lamentation...if I interpret this correctly... 1. Mr. Evans believes the current rules do not distinguish why the ball went dead, and therefore the runner can correct his error in ANY dead ball situation 2. Mr. Evans does not agree with that position, and would like to see a distinction, especially if it's the runner who called time I'd go a bit further - since a runner can't "call" time, I think that's moot. The umpire grants time. And, likely, if the runner didn't request it, the defense probably would. It might be different if the runner CAUSED the dead ball (ie. INT)...but at that point he's out anyway so it's moot. But I don't disagree in principle - I'd like to see a distinction between a dead ball caused by the ball going out of play vs end of playing action.

If you will see my initial response you will see my initial aversion to this, for the same reasons you cite. Just without knowing any rules at all the initial gut reaction is to disallow this. It just doesn't seem "right". To repeat what I said before...it's "icky". I like it even less when you not only let him retouch first, but also let him return to second. I'm simply saying that 5.09(c) does not distinguish between a dead ball caused by a ball going out of play vs INT/OBS vs an umpire calling/granting Time. It simply indicates that a baserunning error CAN be corrected during a dead ball, and the only restriction it defines is where the runner is located. Putting it together with 5.06(c) creates, at best, a conflict that needs to be resolved. FED resolves this by not letting him return after reaching second at any time (not to mention the ability to verbally appeal). Me - in OBR I'm letting him correct the error 5.09(c)...AND keeping him at first 5.06(c). And then letting either the offense or the defense file a protest and see where it lands. I'll take it to the Supreme Court. 😁 Edit: and I make the same ruling whether he missed first, or left first early on a tag up.

Nothing invented, not by us anyway...MLBUM clearly uses this standard as a measure to determine a runner's location and their ability to correct a baserunning error...in defining "their next base". That is, the award is defined by TOT, but their next base is defined by when the ball went out of play.

Different conversation. The initial conversation was whether or not the runner was "past or beyond"...that was the one where I found the MLBUM reference you mentioned, and realized the distinction between how FED and OBR handle that specific piece. Senor Azul kept arguing against me (and you) on that position. The issue of whether or not an award resets when the runner corrects his error (in both missed based and left early situations) is a different topic...we still haven't seen any other opinions on that one. (and to be clear, I see your reasoning, and I can buy it...I'm just hoping for other documentation to support it)

Not sure why you would think that...over and over again I used OBR and MLBUM references and very clearly, once I found the MLBUM position, demonstrated that I understood the OBR position on when a runner can correct a baserunning error in a dead ball. You were the one who continued to argue against that. I did make a joke about the FED dead ball appeal rule...but I forget sometimes that you're an irony free zone.

The underlying principle and spirit in the history of baseball is that a runner is out if they are tagged while off the base...and, if they are tagged while on the base, they are safe...ergo, a tie MUST go to the runner. As I've said before, they can have a tie in the Olympic marathon to three decimals place, but you can't have a tie to 90 feet in baseball. If you want to get really technical about it, if you get to the molecular level then yes, there won't be a tie, per se...but there will also never be contact...at the molecular level the ball never touches the glove, the glove never touches the runner, the runner never touches the base. You'd never get out of the first inning - the offense would score infinitely and you'd never get them out...they'd never touch any bases, but you'd never be able to complete any appeals....except in FED.

First - fix your post...your post attributes a quote to me (about being correct) and I said no such thing. I know that FED treats this differently, but this has been an OBR discussion since the OP...And this following statement is from the MLBUM. "Runners on first and second, one out. Batter hits deep fly ball that is caught by right fielder. The runner from second was running when the ball was hit, did not tag up, and proceeds to touch and round third base. After the runner from second has rounded third base, the right fielder throws behind the runner from first, who is returning to first base. The fielder's throw is wild and goes out of play. The umpires call "Time" and award the runners home and third. When the umpires call "Time" the runner from second is between third and home, and the runner from first is between first and second. At this point the manager yells to the runner from second (who is between third and home) to go back and tag up at second base. Is this permissible, or is the runner considered a "base beyond" the base he left too soon? Ruling: It is permissible for the runner to return to second base while the ball is dead. When the ball went out of play the runner originally on second base was past third (between third and home). The runner's "next base" is therefore home. While the ball is dead he may return to second base and retouch at any time prior to touching home plate. However, if the runner advances to and touches home while the ball is dead, he may not return."

LOL - in FED you would still get the race as you can verbally appeal during a dead ball. It's adjudicating scenarios that are likely to come up, or have come up. I'd suggest a scenario like the OP is not in there because it hasn't come up before, not because it's inherently obvious, and that its lack of presence in the MLBUM should not be interpreted one way or the other. I think the scenario needs to be in there, whatever the proper ruling is.

I've done the research...I'm not seeing anything to support your position. Forgive me if I don't take your word at face value. You can keep repeating the same thing over and over again all you want...that does not, on its face, make it true. You either have a citation/case play/interpretation, or you don't. Without supporting documentation, this exists only in your imagination. This is not the first time your response has been "go do the research" when challenged on a position you couldn't support with evidence. You're making the claim of certainty...the onus is on you to prove it.

Read the rest of the thread...if a runner misses/leaves second base, and is beyond third base when the ball goes out of play, his "next base" is now home, and he is indeed permitted to return to second to correct his error, as long as he doesn't touch home first.

What do you have to cite that? Let us say you have a runner between 2nd and 3rd base when a throw from the outfield went out of play...in scenario 1 he missed first base on a ball he hit, and in scenario 2 he left first base early on a caught ball. In both cases the award is based on where they were located at TOT - in both cases the award is home. And in both cases they are free to advance on that award, and in both cases they are at risk of being put out on appeal if they don't first correct their baserunning error. And, unless there is evidence to the contrary, in both cases if they correct their error by touching first base, then the award is reset from the correction, and in both cases the award is now third base. I'm asking you for the ruling/case play/interpretation that states that one is treated differently than the other. Edit: I can see the logic - prevents someone with the diabolical plan of running on any fly ball in the hopes of the ball ending up out of play before an appeal is made. Or, less cynically, prevents the offense from benefiting from their illegal head start. I'm just looking for the supporting documentation. Is the position that, since the MLBUM only specifically addresses the reset after the catch, then the missed base must not apply to the same restriction? I would posit that the scenario is so rare - that is, runner misses first base, and then doesn't decide to do anything about it until after he has passed second base - that it's never come up to be addressed, and likely is never anticipated to need to be addressed, and that it's omission in the MLBUM or anywhere shouldn't really hold any weight to its meaning. it simply makes more sense to keep the two scenarios consistent, even though one scenario has likely never happened, and never will.

MLB UMPIRE MANUAL PROCEDURES AND INTERPRETATIONS (readkong.com) Go to the above link and scroll to section 5.11 RETOUCHING BASES WHEN BALL IS DEAD Particularly examples 4 and 5. In both cases the runner left second before the catch, and is either on or beyond third base when the ball goes out of play, and in both cases is permitted to return to second base to correct the error. Because when the ball goes out of play their "next base" is now home. If they were to touch home they would not be able to return to second. "When the ball went out of play the runner originally on second base was past third (between third and home). The runner's "next base" is therefore home" The only thing that differs in the OP is no ball was thrown out of play, and there was no award. B/R is standing on second base when the umpire calls Time. That makes his "next base" third. I would suggest this does not exclude the missed base scenario from being treated the same way, it's simply an example for a more common scenario. I can't fathom any reason why they'd be treated differently.

Correct me if I'm wrong...but let's say in OP, while standing on second, the ball is instead thrown out of play. B/R would be awarded home. However, when he returns to first to correct the miss, his award would then become 3rd base...right? Based on that principle, I think the correct administration of the OP is to allow B/R to correct his baserunning error during the dead ball (5.09 (c)), but once he does so he may not advance to any other base - he may not advance bases during a dead ball (5.06 (c)), unless there was an award, which there was not. Anyway, tell me I'm an idiot all you want - that's a resolution I can sleep with, and defend.

As shown in the MLBUM references in my post above, since the OP runner was at second base when the ball became dead, his next base is third...he can return to first as long as he doesn't touch third base. 5.09 (c)(2) covers appeal plays and only says this: APPROVED RULING: (A) No runner may return to touch a missed base after a following runner has scored. (B) When the ball is dead, no runner may return to touch a missed base or one he has left after he has advanced to and touched a base beyond the missed base There's no mention of an award restriction; this is purely about being able to correct a baserunning error while the ball is dead, and the limitation...and the only limitation appears to be about the next base after the ball goes dead, which in the OP's case is third base. Edit: having said that, it just creates an odd and icky scenario. B/R misses first, advances to second. Dead ball. During dead ball coach tells his pitcher to appeal...while the ball is still dead R2 returns to first, touches it...AND THEN returns to second? Without a specific interpretation that limits this capability to award scenarios, this is what the rules appear to allow. If nothing else I'd want the runner to be stuck at first after correcting his error during a dead ball. He gets a free ride back to first base...he shouldn't get a free ride back to second too. And maybe that could be justified by 5.06(c) Rule 5.06(c): ...While the ball is dead no player may be put out, no bases may be run and no runs may be scored, except that runners may advance one or more bases as the result of acts which occurred while the ball was alive (such as, but not limited to a balk, an overthrow, interference, or a home run or other fair ball hit out of the playing field).

Umpire wouldn't say ANYTHING in a scenario where the runner is not allowed to correct their mistake. They would only rule on the appeal. Nothing is preventing the runner from touching first and returning to second. The only ruling would have to come if a proper appeal is made. OP doesn't say who asked for time, and probably doesn't matter. The umpire granted time...to someone. Found it at Baseball Rules Academy - don't know what year...may be splitting hairs...but the manual actually says "The "next base" or "base beyond" in this section refers to the position of the runner at the time the ball went out of play." All the scenarios represent instances where the defense throws the ball out of play...though I'm guessing it doesn't matter...dead is dead. So the closest thing we have to the play in question is scenario 4 and 5: "Runner on second base, no outs. Batter hits fly ball to right field that is caught for the first out. Runner at second base leaves too soon. Runner slides into third base safely, but the right fielder's throw goes into the dugout. Ruling: Runner is awarded home. However, while the ball is dead the runner must return to and retouch second base. Furthermore, because he had already reached third base before the ball went out of play, the runner must return to second base before touching home (his next base). If the runner touches home, he may not return to second, and if the defense appeals he is declared out at second." "Runners on first and second, one out. Batter hits deep fly ball that is caught by right fielder. The runner from second was running when the ball was hit, did not tag up, and proceeds to touch and round third base. After the runner from second has rounded third base, the right fielder throws behind the runner from first, who is returning to first base. The fielder's throw is wild and goes out of play. The umpires call "Time" and award the runners home and third. When the umpires call "Time" the runner from second is between third and home, and the runner from first is between first and second. At this point the manager yells to the runner from second (who is between third and home) to go back and tag up at second base. Is this permissible, or is the runner considered a "base beyond" the base he left too soon? Ruling: It is permissible for the runner to return to second base while the ball is dead. When the ball went out of play the runner originally on second base was past third (between third and home). The runner's "next base" is therefore home. While the ball is dead he may return to second base and retouch at any time prior to touching home plate. However, if the runner advances to and touches home while the ball is dead, he may not return." So, based on those, the runner in the OP corrected his error, assuming we can extend these to ANY reason the ball is dead.

Show the source please. I'd like to see the full text. I do believe that in FED they even have a provision to make an exception for the defense intentionally sending the ball out of play while the batter/runner has missed first and passed second, which would otherwise prevent the runner from correcting the mistake. That is, if the ball went out of play unintentionally while the runner was at/beyond the next base, they would not be able to correct the mistake. Otherwise, if the runner can correct the mistake, AND go back to second, that's....icky.

out. 5.09 (c)(2) APPROVED RULING: (A) No runner may return to touch a missed base after a following runner has scored. (B) When the ball is dead, no runner may return to touch a missed base or one he has left after he has advanced to and touched a base beyond the missed base This would be true even on a home run trot...if he missed first and passed second before deciding to do something about it, he would not be able to correct the mistake.

And in ruling that, the rule makers create a conflict, IMO. On a bases loaded BB with two outs...if R2 rounds third base and is tagged out before R3 reaches home, the run still counts, because R3 is considered to have obtained the next base, pending only a legal touch. IMO, TOT awards "should" compound, to align with the spirit of the above ruling, and to align with the spirit of the award itself. If a baserunner on a walk is immediately considered to have reached the next base, a subsequent TOT award should start from there. TOP awards would still be concurrent, and not stack; they are effectively two awards of the same base - eg. pitched ball four goes out of play. *the above represents only the editorial opinions of beerguy55 and do not represent the thoughts of anyone else whatsoever.

This one is about perspective. If the umpire sees a batter who is not looking at the pitcher he should be not allowing the pitch, and everything follows properly at that point. However, if the umpire does not observe this, but instead observes a batter who is ready and allows the pitch, then he is going to see this as a swing.

The problem with this is there are many cases - especially at younger levels - where the batter swings with the intent to NOT hit the pitch (eg. on a steal play to hopefully distract the catcher). That is indeed a swing, even though there was no "attempt to hit the pitch".

The batter becomes a runner when he hits a "fair" ball. While in the air the ball is neither fair nor foul. In this scenario the ball is not fair until the fielder touches it. The runner is not forced until that point. So there's about a microsecond where the runner is forced before the batter/runner is retired.

Not implied at all, in fact, the opposite - by definition, on a check(ed) swing the batter did NOT go. Was just making sure you're only volunteering if you saw a swing (ie. he did not check his swing). In case some newer umpires think this is a great idea, get overzealous and volunteer a no/safe signal before the plate umpire has had a chance to indicate the batter did swing.

Only if he went, right?