Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TOMUIC

  1. In OBR,one of the following would likely be the case: 1-If the thrown bat misses the pitched ball, it is a strike. 2-If the thrown bat hits the pitched ball, it is a”batted ball” (fair/foul) 3- In either case 1or2, if the thrown bat interferes with the catcher or other fielder attempting to make a play on any runner, or if the thrown bat hits the batted ball a second time in fair territory, then the batter is out, the ball is dead, and runners return to their original base.
  2. The current OBR INTERPRETATION is that the order of appeals DOES MATTER, EVEN IF BOTH APPEALS ARE FORCE PLAYS. This was not always the case, but according to Jim Evans the interpretation has changed and under today’s interpretation an appeal on a following runner REMOVES THE FORCE ON OTHER RUNNERS! Jim sent me this current interpretation via Email on 9/23/2021. I also spoke to Matt (an instructor at Wendelstedt’s School) on or about Oct 20 (last month) and he confirmed what Jim said.
  3. Beer guy is properly applying 5.09(b and by the way the current interpretation in OBR is that the order of appeals DOES matter!! In the OP cited the force on R1 at 2nd remained in effect because the BR was not retired at 1st (like being forced) but rather was out at 3rd, resulting in no need to apply 5.09(b)(6) and therefore making the moment of the missed base relevant.
  4. Beer guy is properly applying 5.09(b and by the way the current interpretation in OBR is that the order of appeals DOES matter!!
  5. OBR 5.09(b)(6) Revisited Loaded bases, 1 out. Batter bunts and the 1st baseman makes a diving attempt and fields the ball cleanly (on one hop). By the time he touches 1st base, barely retiring the batter-runner, R1 has missed and passed 2nd base, while R2 has stopped between second and third, not sure if the ball was caught in flight. NOW if the ball is thrown to third, R2 MOST CERTAINLY HAS TO BE TAGGED TO BE RETIRED ( no one would argue otherwise)! Yet, many here say that R1 would be considered forced out if he was called out on appeal for missing 2nd base! So, in essence, we now have the lead runner (R2) NO LONGER FORCED, yet the runner immediately following him (R1) is still considered in a FORCE SITUATION! (WOW) So let’s carry out this play to its conclusion. Say the 1st baseman’s throw to third to retire R2 is wild, allowing R2 to cross the plate as R1 advances to 3rd ( without ever touching 2nd base). Now the defense appeals and R2 is called out for missing 2nd base for the third out. Now the popular thinking on this thread (other than SENOR AZUL) is that the appealed third out in this play is a FORCE OUT , BECAUSE OF “WHEN” THE RUNNER MISSED 2nd BASE, hence nullifying the runs scored by R3 and R2. Once again, this line of thinking has the lead runner no longer “forced”, and yet another runner (from an immediate following base) still considered in a force situation. Somewhat “faulty” thinking? However, if one simply applies OBR 5.09(b)(6) on this play, then the out on the BR at 1st base (considered a force) simply removes the force on R1, REGARDLESS of WHEN R1 actually misses 2nd base. Conversely , “ if a following runner is retired in a manner OTHER THAN ON A FORCE PLAY, “THEN THE MOMENT THE PRECEDING RUNNER MISSES THE NEXT BASE DOES MATTER ”, WITH REGARD TO WHETHER AN EVENTUAL APPEAL AT THAT BASE RESULTS IN A FORCE OUT OR NOT. I have never attempted to claim that the MOMENT a forced base is missed is inconsequential. Rather, I am attempting to point out, as 5.09(b)(6) clearly does, that A FORCE OUT ON A FOLLOWING RUNNER RENDERS THAT MOMENT A MOOT POINT.
  6. Just refer to Señor Azul’s response( Oct 14) and you will have the right answer. As he stated we are right and the others are wrong. Unless they can show us a current MLB interpretation, which evidently they cannot.
  7. I am not sure if I’m following the last sentence of your response properly. Suppose with loaded bases and a ground ball to the first baseman who steps on first (retiring the BR)before the runner from first is anywhere near second, and now this same runner misses second on his way to 3rd due to a wild throw, If this runner is out on appeal and it’s the third out, any runs scored ahead of him will count because his out is NOT a force out. Again, if I’m not following your last statement properly I apologize. Also my only concern here is OBR, nothing else
  8. Senor Azul, thank you for your response. I value your responses and know you won’t state anything that cannot be supported by rule. I have been less aggressive in my stances on this website, not because I’m not sure of myself, but I haven’t been involved as long as many of the names found here. I was hoping you would get involved in this ongoing discussion, and I am so glad that you did. One gentleman on this site (several weeks back) who did not agree with what you and I are agreeing upon now, told me to call it the way I want and enjoy my 10U career. That was quite a remark, but I’m not here to argue, I just want proper rule interpretations presented, just as I know you do.
  9. The only Wendelsted RIM that has been cited here was the 2013 manual, which states that the order does matter when exactly 3 outs result from multiple appeals.. As Señor Azul stated, is there a more current ruling regarding this matter. I contend that the current OBR interpretation is that the order of appeals matters.
  10. Señor Azul, are you agreeing that as long as a force out occurs on a following runner, then the moment that the preceding runner misses the next base does not matter. That is the point I have been trying to make regarding 5.09(b)(6), which would then also support the fact that the order of appeals does matter with regard to negating runs.
  11. Thank you Senor Azul for citing the Wendelstedt interpretation in its entirety. If others refer to the current OBR Interpretation of “the order of appeals “ I think they will see that it is in agreement with what you quoted from the Wendelstedt Manual.
  12. R1 & R3, one out. Ground ball thrown past the 1st baseman who retrieves the ball. R3 has crossed the plate and R1 has already passed second when the first baseman steps on 1st appealing that the BR missed 1st base.The umpire immediately calls the BR out (now 2outs) as the ball is then thrown to 3rd where R1 is called safe. Now the 3rd baseman properly appeals and R1 is called out for missing 2nd base (for the third out). Based on current OBR interpretation should R3 legally score a run?
  13. The wording is quite precise, it says that if a following runner is put out on a force play, the force is removed.
  14. Loaded bases. One out.Ball hit sharply to center. R1 is forced out at second base AFTER R2 has PASSED AND MISSED third base. Both R3 and R2 score. Now R2 is out on appeal for missing 3rd base for the third out. Since OBR 5.09(b)(6) clearly states that THE FORCE IS REMOVED ON A RUNNER IF A FOLLOWING RUNNER IS PUT OUT ON A FORCE PLAY, it appears that R3’s run will count despite the popular thinking that the force existed at the time the base was missed, which in many instances is indeed the case, BUT NOT SO IF 5.09(b)(6) is properly applied. If “when the missed base occurs” is the only factor in determining whether the force is still in place, then there is NO REASON WHATSOEVER for 5.09(b)(6) to include the wording “ON A FORCE PLAY”. Simply stating that “retiring a following runner before a runner reaches the base originally forced to”would be a more than sufficient interpretation. However, the wording of 5.09(b)(6) has been in the OBR no less than forty years,so to categorize it as just one of the many “errors” found in the rules is somewhat narrow minded. I would think 5.09(b)(6) may also play a role in the seemingly ongoing debate regarding the “order of appeals”. Looking forward to healthy discussion.
  15. Maybe the answer to this discussion lies with OBR 5.09(b)(6) which states that the force is removed if a following runner is retired ON A FORCE OUT.
  16. TOMUIC

    Infield Fly

    The act of a fielder intentionally dropping a fly ball or line drive, AFTER MAKING A CATCH, can occur at any time. Naturally, the application of the rule ( ball dead , batter out , runners return ) is determined by the conditions found in the rule itself. PLAY: Runner on second, one out. Pop up to the second basemen. The ball is caught, then voluntarily and intentionally released (dropped) to the ground ( the runner was several feet off second from the time the pitch was delivered). The runner breaks for third (without retouching second) and is safe at third. if a proper appeal is made ,the runner will be out. In this play the fielder clearly made a catch ,then chose to drop it, (for whatever reason). If asked, the umpire will simply explain that a catch was made (batter out), but the ball remains alive (first base not occupied). Once again, the physical act of dropping the ball intentionally after making a catch, can occur at any time, yet is totally independent of whether or not the rule for an intentionally dropped ball will be applied.
  17. TOMUIC

    Infield Fly

    OBR A declared infield fly is caught, then intentionally dropped to the ground. The runner from third, standing several feet off third base from the time the pitch was delivered, sees the ball on the ground, breaks for the plate, (without tagging up) and scores. If the defense appeals, is the runner out?
  18. TOMUIC

    Runs Scoring

    PLAY: Loaded bases, 2 out. On a base-hit to the outfield, the runners from second and third score. The runner from first misses second and when he is almost to third base the coach yells to him to go back and touch second. As he is returning to second, the batter-runner is tagged out between 1st and 2nd (for the third out), JUST BEFORE the runner is able to get back to second base. Playing under OBR, can the defense appeal the runner missing second and if so, what happens?
  • Create New...