CJK

Guys, I really appreciate the input, especially given that it's a question with its roots in slow-pitch softball. I totally understand the idea of a retreating/advancing runner being required to touch the bases in order and the "last time by" principle, and I thought about them when I considered the situation. I 100% understand using those concepts if this had been R1 advancing past 2B on the play, then retreating, then advancing again. I'm struggling with the idea that R2 can be "retreating" on this play, though. I didn't think it was an option for a runner to return to base before his TOP base (Jean Segura in 2013 notwithstanding). R2 certainly wasn't running the bases in in reverse order to retouch 1B. Suppose F6 were near the baseline and the ball had been grounded toward 2B, R2 retreated to 2B, F6 took an angle right across 2B, and R2 hopped out of the way (toward 1B) to avoid contact, then advanced to 3B. Would you have the same call? Please understand that I truly respect your answers and I do not intend this to be argumentative at all. I'm just really challenged by calling this "retreating" and trying to find a way that feels more intuitive, I guess.

This happened in a USSSA slow-pitch softball game, but I'm very interested in rulings from any code. R2, outs don't matter, ball lined up the middle. R2 avoids the ball by moving past 2B toward RF (basically along the 2B/3B line extended). The ball goes into the outfield and R2 advances to 3B. At the end of the play, F9 appeals a missed base on the premise that R2 "retreated" past 2B and failed to touch 2B while advancing. Is R2 out on appeal? If you'd call R2 out, what rule would you use to support it?

I've never seen a 3d printer print paper. I've only seen them print plastic. And I have one at home that can print small pieces (about 7x7x7) using mostly the cheapest plastics (ABS and PLA). Neither of those is suitable for a throat guard, though, unless you want one that looks cool but will break down in the sun and probably split and slice your jugular if it gets hit. There are 3d printers that can print materials like carbon fiber-infused nylon (nylon carbonite), which is billed as being nearly as strong as steel. The spools of material aren't too pricey (in the $80-$100) range. The low-end printers for the material are quite a bit pricier ($5000-ish). Let me add that my son had some 3d parts printed for his Eagle project ( about 7x2x5 plastic pieces that sit on the top of a 1 1/4 inch pipe and support lighting elements. We had them printed by a service that we found on the internet (I think about $60 for 10 pieces). He got other quotes (online and locally) for up to $250 to print the same parts. He could have had the part designed for another $250 or so, but we did that ourselves. We learned about designing and printing the part from the DoSpace in Omaha, but ended up downloading a free program to design the parts on a laptop at home. I'm sure you could find places online (and probably locally, if you live in a city of any size) that will print your design.

All of this assumes that the ball is not touched by a player, of course.

How will you evaluate whether it's actually protective? I mean, what if it's of low quality? And how will you defend yourself legally if that unapproved "protective" equipment shatters and a shard of it goes into the catcher's eye? What will you do if it's your own eye? If you follow the rules the way they're written, NOCSAE and NFHS are on the hook. If you don't, it's you.

I don't disagree with you in principle, @beerguy55, but every umpire makes mistakes, experiences brain cramps, misses a call due to poor timing, or whatever. Sometimes, we don't really have a way to fix it. This thread contains a good example of an instance where an umpire might err, putting one or both teams in jeopardy, but has a way to right the wrong.

We do, and that's why we require the coaches to ensure that their players are legally and properly equipped. But "player safety" is not carte blanche for behavior that is inappropriate or can be perceived as inappropriate.

I think the wording "In this case" is very important here. In the case play, it's probably the right thing to do, assuming that the runners did not attempt to advance until after the ball touched the ground. In fact, it was probably the right thing to do in the OP, as well. However, if the runner from 3rd (for whatever reason, including simply not being aware of the situation) had advanced immediately and been "almost home" when the ball touched the ground, it would probably be right to score that run. And if the runner from 1st (again for whatever reason, including simply not being aware of the situation) had advanced immediately, s/he may very well be declared out because s/he would have been doubled off 1st or tagged out at 2nd as the trailing of the 2 runners standing there. The OP umpire's (and the case play's) solution of "everybody goes back" will probably be right most of the time, but it's not a rule. Sometimes, you have to be the umpire, make an unpopular decision, let someone (respectfully) express their disagreement/displeasure, and live with it.

What a perfect citation. This is exactly the situation I had in mind.

Since the original question has been pretty thoroughly answered, I don't feel bad about this minor hijack: Suppose R1 was going on the pitch and the ball was hit in the air to F7. As R1 is rounding 2B, s/he sees the fly ball and heads directly back to 1B (missing 2B). F7 makes the catch and throws toward F3, who does not catch the ball. R1 sees the throw get away, touches 1B, and advances to 2B as F3 retrieves the ball. There are no longer any oustanding appeal-able base running errors, are there?

That seems like it could be disastrous if you end up with a slicing ball near the line.

Why so much arguing? That doesn't sound like a fun league at all.

Quite possibly true in higher-level baseball. When it comes to softball, though, I've used them at all levels and I love them.

It's a better parallel if the punching bag is standing there ahead of time and just slides over 2 feet right at the end. Plus, the instructions for the test need to indicate that the punching bag might move, and also make clear that it's completely against the rules of the exercise to cause significant damage the punching bag.

If I'm enforcing that penalty correctly and the coach asks how come his runner can't score, I'd ask him if he's saying he wants the option to take the play. If he doesn't even ask a question about it, though, I'm not going to do his job for him.