Runner's Requirements on a Force Play

[Mudder]

R1, R2, ground ball to F6, although R1 and R2 have lost the right to occupy their respective bases because the batter has become a runner, there is no requirement for them to physically move from their bases, or if they started toward the next base to retreat back to their original TOP base to avoid a tag, etc.. Is this correct?

Can someone quote the rule and section, OBR

[UmpJM]

Mudder,

That is correct.

No one can quote a rule. It's not illegal because there is no prohibition against it.

Also, note that if a "forced" runner is tagged while on his "forced from" base he is out, as that base affords him no protection even if he is the only one touching it at the time.

JM

[Rich Ives]

You are correct.

We can't quote a rule that makes them physically advance because you can't quote a rule that doesn't exist.

Absent such a rule (and it is absent) then there is nothing requiring them to physically advance so therefore they do not have to.

[Mudder]

Mudder,

That is correct.

No one can quote a rule. It's not illegal because there is no prohibition against it.

Also, note that if a "forced" runner is tagged while on his "forced from" base he is out, as that base affords him no protection even if he is the only one touching it at the time.

JM

UmpJM, I understand there is no rule per say, but is there anything in writing anywhere that addresses this? I'm trying to settle a disagreement with another ump, and I'd like to produce something if possible, instead of "take my word for it"

[UmpJM]

Mudder,

Does you colleague do softball? I believe (not sure) there may be some such prohibition in (some?) softball rules.

While there is nothing explicit in the text of the rules that says a forced runner may retreat towards or remain at his "forced from" base w/o penalty, I believe it can be conclusively inferred from:

7.03

( b ) If a runner is forced to advance by reason of the batter becoming a runner and

two runners are touching a base to which the following runner is forced, the

following runner is entitled to the base and the preceding runner shall be out

when tagged or when a fielder possesses the ball and touches the base to which

such preceding runner is forced.

JM

[OHUMP]

JM you are correct in softball the batter runner going to first must either advance or hold their ground they cannot retreat but that only applies when going to first.

[Rich Ives]

Proving a negative cannot be done.

You can prove bigfoot exists by finding one and exhibiting it.

You cannot prove bigfoot does not exist because the counter is just "hasn't been found yet but it will be

".

[Mudder]

JM you are correct in softball the batter runner going to first must either advance or hold their ground they cannot retreat but that only applies when going to first.

This is also true is baseball correct?

[Rich Ives]

JM you are correct in softball the batter runner going to first must either advance or hold their ground they cannot retreat but that only applies when going to first.

This is also true is baseball correct?

No.

In baseball the runner can retreat - only out when reaching home plate.

[UmpJM]

Mudder,

No under baseball rules the BR IS permitted to retreat towards home and is not out until/unless he actually reaches home, per the following MLBUM interp:

(1) Runner on first base; batter-runner gets in rundown between home and first. Can obstruction

be called going back to home?

Ruling: No, unless the obstruction is intentional.

NOTE: In situations where the batter-runner gets in a rundown between first and home, if the

batter-runner retreats and reaches home plate, he shall be declared out.

JM

[Jimurray]

Mudder,

No under baseball rules the BR IS permitted to retreat towards home and is not out until/unless he actually reaches home, per the following MLBUM interp:

(1) Runner on first base; batter-runner gets in rundown between home and first. Can obstruction

be called going back to home?

Ruling: No, unless the obstruction is intentional.

NOTE: In situations where the batter-runner gets in a rundown between first and home, if the

batter-runner retreats and reaches home plate, he shall be declared out.

JM

Thankfully this did not pass at the NFHS rules meeting:

"22 8-4-1l (new) Modify:...l. After a fair batted or bunted ball he steps back toward home plate to avoid or delay a tag by a fielder. The batter-runner is out and the ball remains live.

Rationale: By not having a batter-runner retreat rule we allow the offense to have an advantage over the defense. The lack of the rule enables a batter-runner to run toward first base, stop, and then run backward toward home plate in order to create a near run-down situation, confusing the defensive players and prohibiting them from tagging the batter-runner and making a subsequent play on another advancing runner. I have no problem with a batter-runner stopping halfway up the line to allow a defender to tag him, but retreating to delay the inevitable gives the offense too much leeway. Jim Angele Nebraska"

[RichMSN]

Mudder,

No under baseball rules the BR IS permitted to retreat towards home and is not out until/unless he actually reaches home, per the following MLBUM interp:

(1) Runner on first base; batter-runner gets in rundown between home and first. Can obstruction

be called going back to home?

Ruling: No, unless the obstruction is intentional.

NOTE: In situations where the batter-runner gets in a rundown between first and home, if the

batter-runner retreats and reaches home plate, he shall be declared out.

JM

Thankfully this did not pass at the NFHS rules meeting:

"22 8-4-1l (new) Modify:...l. After a fair batted or bunted ball he steps back toward home plate to avoid or delay a tag by a fielder. The batter-runner is out and the ball remains live.

Rationale: By not having a batter-runner retreat rule we allow the offense to have an advantage over the defense. The lack of the rule enables a batter-runner to run toward first base, stop, and then run backward toward home plate in order to create a near run-down situation, confusing the defensive players and prohibiting them from tagging the batter-runner and making a subsequent play on another advancing runner. I have no problem with a batter-runner stopping halfway up the line to allow a defender to tag him, but retreating to delay the inevitable gives the offense too much leeway. Jim Angele Nebraska"

I think it's sad that idiotic rule proposals like this even see the light of day.

[mstaylor]

The definition of a force, plus 7.03 that John quoted proves they lose the right to base but they are not required to vacate. It simply means they are subject to be put out up until a trail runner or BR is put out removing the force. Think of it this way, the ball is hit in the air, with less than two outs, the runner is going to go partway to see if it is caught or not. If it isn't then he has to advance or he can be putout by touching the base or tagging him. Now if it is caught, then runner can return, in fact is required to return, because the force has been removed and he hasn't tagged up.