Re-Tagging the base

[Guest C Rogers]

I'd never heard this before and I cant find a reference for it so I wanted to post it and see if anyone had heard of this before.

A runner on first with no-body out. Batter hits a deep fly ball to left field that may or maynot be caught. The runner on first advances all the way to second and stands with one foot on second and the other foot between first and second (so he has not rounded the base). The left fielder makes the catch and the runner who had one foot on second retreats to first base.

Does the runner have to break contact with second base and then re-tag second base before he can return to first base (retracing his steps even though he never actually rounded second base, only making contact with one foot)?

I know that if he rounds second base he has to retrace his steps and touch second before returning to first base. But I heard on the radio the other day that the runner must re-tag the base (break contact and then re-tag) before he can return to first base. I'd never heard that before and was wondering if it was true and what Rule number would apply, Thanks!

CR

[Thunderheads]

What radio station was that ?!

No, I don't believe he does have to 'break' contact

[noumpere]

I am shocked SHOCKED that a radio station got a rule wrong.

[Thunderheads]

I am shocked SHOCKED that a radio station got a rule wrong.

:wow:

[Guest C Rogers]

Actually the announcer was Mike Shannon on the Cardinals radio station. I missed the first part of his conversation but so I am hoping I understood his point correctly. I had never heard this eithre but supposedly it happend recently in a game???

[JaxRolo]

There are no Breaks needed

[mstaylor]

Wow, a new myth. No, the reason you never heard it before is he just made it up. Just so you know, ex-players and managers suck at knowing the rules. It is part of my 80/20 theory, you play 80% of the games with 20% of the rules. So players can play their whole career and only see some situations a few times, then did the umpire get it right?

[Umpire in Chief]

The runner is free to return at any time. No need to hold at second until the catch.

[basejester]

The runner is free to return at any time. No need to hold at second until the catch.

That wasn't the question.

[Rich Ives]

The runner is free to return at any time. No need to hold at second until the catch.

That wasn't the question.

If there's no need to hold second how can there be a need to re-tag it? He!!, if have to re-tag you could stretch this into requiring the runner to go to 2B and re-tag before returning. Preposterous questions get the answers they deserve.

[noumpere]

The runner is free to return at any time. No need to hold at second until the catch.

That wasn't the question.

If there's no need to hold second how can there be a need to re-tag it? He!!, if have to re-tag you could stretch this into requiring the runner to go to 2B and re-tag before returning. Preposterous questions get the answers they deserve.

If the runner had gone past second thered be a need to retag it even though theres still not a need to hod it, so I dont follow your statement. But Im just back and ready for bed so maybe Im not thinking clearly.

[Rich Ives]

The runner is free to return at any time. No need to hold at second until the catch.

That wasn't the question.

If there's no need to hold second how can there be a need to re-tag it? He!!, if have to re-tag you could stretch this into requiring the runner to go to 2B and re-tag before returning. Preposterous questions get the answers they deserve.

If the runner had gone past second thered be a need to retag it even though theres still not a need to hod it, so I dont follow your statement. But Im just back and ready for bed so maybe Im not thinking clearly.

1) He hadn't gone past 2nd. Not the subject of this conversation.

2) The OP already posted and recognized that need in the go-past situation.

[basejester]

If there's no need to hold second how can there be a need to re-tag it?

I think the question is how to apply this rule:

7.02 In advancing, a runner shall touch first, second, third and home base in order. If

forced to return, he shall retouch all bases in reverse order, unless the ball is dead under any provision of Rule 5.09. In such cases, the runner may go directly to his original base.

The question is, having touched second, but not having passed it, does the runner have to "retouch" second? And the answer is a resounding no.

He!!, if have to re-tag you could stretch this into requiring the runner to go to 2B and re-tag before returning. Preposterous questions get the answers they deserve.

Not all preposterous questions are in fact the same question.

[Rich Ives]

If there's no need to hold second how can there be a need to re-tag it?

I think the question is how to apply this rule:

7.02 In advancing, a runner shall touch first, second, third and home base in order. If

forced to return, he shall retouch all bases in reverse order, unless the ball is dead under any provision of Rule 5.09. In such cases, the runner may go directly to his original base.

The question is, having touched second, but not having passed it, does the runner have to "retouch" second? And the answer is a resounding no.

He!!, if have to re-tag you could stretch this into requiring the runner to go to 2B and re-tag before returning. Preposterous questions get the answers they deserve.

Not all preposterous questions are in fact the same question.

If the answer was, in your words, "a resounding no, then iit was a preposterous question.

[basejester]

If the answer was, in your words, "a resounding no, then iit was a preposterous question.

Okay.

I never said it wasn't a preposterous question.

[mstaylor]

I think the OP has been misunderstood to a point. As I read it the runner has gone to second and is standing there, not because he thinks he has to hold that base, he just isn't trying to advance any further. Then the ball is caught and tries to return to first so he isn't doubled off. The question is does he have to break contact, then recontact the base before he can return. The answer is absolutely not. He can return at any point in the play but simply can just leave second. The only time he has to worry about retouching second is if he has passed it.

[noumpere]

I think the OP has been misunderstood to a point. As I read it the runner has gone to second and is standing there, not because he thinks he has to hold that base, he just isn't trying to advance any further. Then the ball is caught and tries to return to first so he isn't doubled off. The question is does he have to break contact, then recontact the base before he can return. The answer is absolutely not. He can return at any point in the play but simply can just leave second. The only time he has to worry about retouching second is if he has passed it.

I agree with this and apologize for any confusion I caused in my previous response to some other variation on the play which still doesnt make sense to me but doesnt matter either.

[Guest umpire78]

I'd never heard this before and I cant find a reference for it so I wanted to post it and see if anyone had heard of this before.

A runner on first with no-body out. Batter hits a deep fly ball to left field that may or maynot be caught. The runner on first advances all the way to second and stands with one foot on second and the other foot between first and second (so he has not rounded the base). The left fielder makes the catch and the runner who had one foot on second retreats to first base.

Does the runner have to break contact with second base and then re-tag second base before he can return to first base (retracing his steps even though he never actually rounded second base, only making contact with one foot)?

I know that if he rounds second base he has to retrace his steps and touch second before returning to first base. But I heard on the radio the other day that the runner must re-tag the base (break contact and then re-tag) before he can return to first base. I'd never heard that before and was wondering if it was true and what Rule number would apply, Thanks!

CR

No, he does NOT have to "break contact." He did the right thing by NOT rounding the base.