What's the call?

[Haid D' Salaami]

umpireplb- Did you read the thread at all? The crux of the discussion is "F8 throws batter out at first". This negates the force if R1 has not reached 2nd base when BR is thrown out.

but it doesn't change the the status of R1.. he was still forced and by rule with the appeal, he can be called out, and since it was a force no runs score.

Wendelstedt disagrees with you. Please read the thread.

So you think I just came in and posted without reading 5 pages.. come on man..

[Haid D' Salaami]

Ok, so i did reread the op again... and I was wrong, I thought B1 was out after he touched 1st..

[umpireplb]

The only thing "circular" here is some of the logic, or lack of it, being applied to the play under discussion. There appears to be some confusion as a result of the batter/runner being thrown out at first prior to the appeal being sustained on the runner from first who missed second on his way to third. In this play, the out on the batter/runner does not remove the force on the runner advancing from first to third. That runner, as soon as the batter hits the ball, is forced to advance to second. The fact that the appeal is sustained after the batter/runner is thrown out at first has no bearing on the fact that the runner on first was forced to advance by reason of the batter becoming a runner. The order of the outs sustained seems to have injected an element into the play that is confusing quite a few commenters here, but the rule itself is clear. No run can ever score on a play where the third out is the result of a force play. The runner from first was forced to advance to second. At the moment he missed it, the batter/runner had not been thrown out at first, and the fact that he was thrown out at first before the appeal on the preceding runner was sustained does not negate the fact that the runner on first was forced to advance and was called out for not reaching the base to which he was forced to advance. Overcomplicating this is creating a lot of confusion, but reducing this play down to its basic components makes it relatively simple to figure out.

So to answer the question, "Umpireplb, did you read the thread at all," my reply is yes, I did. "R1 and R3, 1 out. Batter hits single to RF." That's the situation. "R1 advances to 3B but misses 2B." That's the next part of the play. The runner on first did not touch the base to which he was forced to advance. "F8 throws the batter out at first base for the 2nd out." Two outs. "The defense properly appeals that R1 missed 2B." The key now becomes: did the play on the batter/runner remove the force on the runner at first who advanced to third? The answer is NO, it did not, because according to rule 4.09, "with two out, the runner is out at the moment he misses the bag, if an appeal is sustained as applied to the following runners." In this case, technically speaking, the runner missed the bag when there was still only one out, and the out at first occurred AFTER the runner had already missed second base. So that out at first has not removed the runner's responsibility to touch the base to which he is forced to advance by reason of the batter having become a runner. The fact that the batter/runner is called out at first before the appeal was made on the runner advancing from first to third, again, does not negate the force on that runner. Forget about the "order" of the outs on this play; the appeal is throwing a monkey wrench into an accurate interpretation of this play. The key is, was the runner on first forced to advance? Yes. Was his out at the base to which he was forced to advance the third out of the half inning? Yes. The out at first on the batter/runner has not removed the force on the runner in front of him (the runner on first) at the moment the runner missed the bag. Can a run score during a play in which the third out of a half inning is the result of a force play? No.

If anyone is still confused, try thinking of it this way. Forget the appeal. Same play, just no appeal. One out, runners on first and third. Batter hits the ball, so the runner on first is forced to advance but is thrown out at second, or even third, it doesn't matter. Two outs. The batter/runner is thrown out before he reaches first base. Three outs. Does anyone think the runner on third's run would count on this play? It definitely would not, because the third out of the half inning (the out on the batter/runner before he reached first) was the result of a force play. So in the play under discussion here, the fact that the out on the batter/runner came before the appeal at second was sustained does not make it a "second out" that removes the force on a preceding runner. That out at first is the third out, not a force-removing second out, because the runner advancing from first to third is already out, before the batter/runner, at the moment he missed the bag, not at the moment the appeal is sustained. Again, this is what the rule says: "...except that with two out the runner is out at the moment he misses the bag, if an appeal is sustained as applied to the following runners."

Does this help? I hope so. I went through Harry Wendelstedt's umpire school training five times over a period of twenty years and took those damn written tests enough times to know unequivocally that I am correct about this ruling. This is not arrogance on my part, it's simple repetition and memory, supported and amplified by thirty-two years' experience and more than six thousand games umpired. No run scores on the play.

[Haid D' Salaami]

You need to go and Read Hunter's post on here.. the br being thrown out does remove the force.. it is kind of the same play with R1 and a ground ball to F3.. if he touches 1st, the force is removed and he must then touch the runner.. but if he touches runner then he can touch 1st..double play..

I understand what your saying..and why you think that.. but when BR was thrown out prior to touching 1st.. the force is then removed..now the appeal becomes a time play.

Also in your "play" the BR being thrown out at 1st is not a FORCE play.

[Haid D' Salaami]

. Does anyone think the runner on third's run would count on this play? It definitely would not, because the third out of the half inning (the out on the batter/runner before he reached first) was the result of a force play.

This is not a force play...

[BretMan]

Ok, so i did reread the op again... and I was wrong, I thought B1 was out after he touched 1st..

No, I don't think that you were wrong. The OP says that the batter "hits a single to RF".

If the batter singled then he must not have been put out before reaching first base. That only leaves the possibility that he was put out after reaching first base.

Not explicitly stated in the OP is whether or not R1 had reached/missed second base at the moment that batter-runner was put out. But the inference is that he missed it before, if you take each element of the sample play and assume that everything in it happened sequentially as written.

When R1 missed second, he was forced to that base. Thus, when the miss was appealed it is treated as a force out and no runs score.

[johnnyg08]

Also in your "play" the BR being thrown out at 1st is not a FORCE play.

agree here

[JaxRolo]

Ok, so i did reread the op again... and I was wrong, I thought B1 was out after he touched 1st..

No, I don't think that you were wrong. The OP says that the batter "hits a single to RF".

.

The OP meant it as the ball getting hit to right field. Not a "single" or "base hit"

The OP author is an idiot that can't write.

Sent from my iPhone using

Tapatalk

www.rivercityumps.com

[Jocko]

The only thing "circular" here is some of the logic, or lack of it, being applied to the play under discussion. There appears to be some confusion as a result of the batter/runner being thrown out at first prior to the appeal being sustained on the runner from first who missed second on his way to third. In this play, the out on the batter/runner does not remove the force on the runner advancing from first to third. That runner, as soon as the batter hits the ball, is forced to advance to second. The fact that the appeal is sustained after the batter/runner is thrown out at first has no bearing on the fact that the runner on first was forced to advance by reason of the batter becoming a runner. The order of the outs sustained seems to have injected an element into the play that is confusing quite a few commenters here, but the rule itself is clear. No run can ever score on a play where the third out is the result of a force play. The runner from first was forced to advance to second. At the moment he missed it, the batter/runner had not been thrown out at first, and the fact that he was thrown out at first before the appeal on the preceding runner was sustained does not negate the fact that the runner on first was forced to advance and was called out for not reaching the base to which he was forced to advance. Overcomplicating this is creating a lot of confusion, but reducing this play down to its basic components makes it relatively simple to figure out.

So to answer the question, "Umpireplb, did you read the thread at all," my reply is yes, I did. "R1 and R3, 1 out. Batter hits single to RF." That's the situation. "R1 advances to 3B but misses 2B." That's the next part of the play. The runner on first did not touch the base to which he was forced to advance. "F8 throws the batter out at first base for the 2nd out." Two outs. "The defense properly appeals that R1 missed 2B." The key now becomes: did the play on the batter/runner remove the force on the runner at first who advanced to third? The answer is NO, it did not, because according to rule 4.09, "with two out, the runner is out at the moment he misses the bag, if an appeal is sustained as applied to the following runners." In this case, technically speaking, the runner missed the bag when there was still only one out, and the out at first occurred AFTER the runner had already missed second base. So that out at first has not removed the runner's responsibility to touch the base to which he is forced to advance by reason of the batter having become a runner. The fact that the batter/runner is called out at first before the appeal was made on the runner advancing from first to third, again, does not negate the force on that runner. Forget about the "order" of the outs on this play; the appeal is throwing a monkey wrench into an accurate interpretation of this play. The key is, was the runner on first forced to advance? Yes. Was his out at the base to which he was forced to advance the third out of the half inning? Yes. The out at first on the batter/runner has not removed the force on the runner in front of him (the runner on first) at the moment the runner missed the bag. Can a run score during a play in which the third out of a half inning is the result of a force play? No.

If anyone is still confused, try thinking of it this way. Forget the appeal. Same play, just no appeal. One out, runners on first and third. Batter hits the ball, so the runner on first is forced to advance but is thrown out at second, or even third, it doesn't matter. Two outs. The batter/runner is thrown out before he reaches first base. Three outs. Does anyone think the runner on third's run would count on this play? It definitely would not, because the third out of the half inning (the out on the batter/runner before he reached first) was the result of a force play. So in the play under discussion here, the fact that the out on the batter/runner came before the appeal at second was sustained does not make it a "second out" that removes the force on a preceding runner. That out at first is the third out, not a force-removing second out, because the runner advancing from first to third is already out, before the batter/runner, at the moment he missed the bag, not at the moment the appeal is sustained. Again, this is what the rule says: "...except that with two out the runner is out at the moment he misses the bag, if an appeal is sustained as applied to the following runners."

Does this help? I hope so. I went through Harry Wendelstedt's umpire school training five times over a period of twenty years and took those damn written tests enough times to know unequivocally that I am correct about this ruling. This is not arrogance on my part, it's simple repetition and memory, supported and amplified by thirty-two years' experience and more than six thousand games umpired. No run scores on the play.

wrong from the start. R1 is forced off of 1B. He may return to 1B after BR iss put out. If he gets pickled up and returns untagged into 1B, you gonna call him out? As soon as the BR is out, the force is removed IF R1 hasn't touched/missed 2B. Baseball 101

[umpireplb]

It doesn't matter whether the batter/runner is thrown out at first before he reaches the bag or afterwards. That out is the second out of the half inning, not the third, so whether it's a force play or not has no bearing on whether or not the run scores. It's true that the example is not clear; it would have helped if it had read F8 throws the batter out RETURNING TO first base for the 2nd out, rather than F8 throws the batter out at first base for the 2nd out. Regardless, the force play is in effect on the runner on first as soon as he legally loses his right to occupy the base by reason of the batter becoming a runner, which is when the ball is batted. He has to touch second base or he risks being called out on appeal, which is what happens here. The out on the batter/runner is the second out of the half inning; the appeal constitutes the third out. At the moment the runner on first missed the second base bag, the force was still in effect, and since the out on him is the third out of the half inning (the appeal was made when two were out) he is considered to be out on a force play, which is the third out of the half inning. No run can score during a play in which the third out of a half inning is the result of a force play.

If the sequence were changed, if the batter/runner's out returning to the first base bag were the third out of the half inning, then it does indeed become a time play and the question would then be, did the runner from third score before the batter/runner was thrown out returning to first base for the third out? In all likelihood, the run would score - unless that runner moved slower than molasses (or lollygagged down the line while watching the action behind him, as I have seen happen multiple times.)

In this example, whether the batter/runner is out on a force play before reaching the bag or is out on a tag play returning to the bag, his out is still the second out of the half inning, not the third. The runner on first is forced to advance to second, did not touch it, and is called out on appeal for the third out. Since the appeal was sustained when two were out, the third out is considered to have occurred at the moment the runner missed the bag when the force was still in effect, not when the appeal is sustained, and it's the result of a force play. No run can score during a play in which the third out of a half inning is the result of a force play, so no run scores on the play presented here regardless of when or how the batter/runner is thrown out.

[grayhawk]

umpireplb, you seem to be missing a very important part of this thread, so I will ask very directly:

If R1 had not yet reached second base when the BR was thrown out, and then missed second on his way to third (unlikely, I know, but stick with me), and then the defense successfully appeals R1's miss of second, is this still a force, or a time play?

[Richvee]

It doesn't matter whether the batter/runner is thrown out at first before he reaches the bag or afterwards.

It most certainly does. If the BR is thrown out before he reaches 1st, and R1 has not yet reached 2nd, the force on R1 @2nd is removed. If R1 then proceeds to miss 2nd, the appeal would not be a force for the 3rd out, and the run scores.

[Jocko]

:banghead: :Horse:

[noumpere]

I agree with Jocko,

Let the Mayan Apocalypse begin.

[grayhawk]

I agree with Jocko,

Let the Mayan Apocalypse begin.

I'm with you, but I'll leave a gift for anyone that survives: Don't read past page 3 of this thread!

[jjskitours]

Hard to believe umpireplb. All that verbage and experience and bottom line - he's wrong. Not sure where he is getting the words as quoted for 4.09, but there is no doubt, absolutely no doubt that the FORCE was removed and that the appeal at 2nd base is a TIMING PLAY.

[Birdieseeker]

OK so I'm just reading a little bit because I woke up too early this morning. On the nightstand I have Carl Childress' book, 151 Ways to Ruin A Baseball Game. I received it last week with the BRD and I consider this a lighter read than some of the other books and manuals I have on my winter reading list. Back to my point On pages 32-33 situation 18, Cancel a run improperly, the second to last paragraph states, "In spite of those third-world plays, though, the major rules that govern scoring are simple. No run may score if the third out is made by:

a runner being forced out.

the batter-runner before he reaches first safely.

a previous runner called out on appeal for missing a base."

So now if I'm applying what he's saying to the OP correctly, I have to change my opinion and say the run does not score because of a previous runner called out on an appeal for missing a base that would be the third out. Time play or force play is doesn't seem to matter. I'm certainly no expert but I would love to get a correct ruling on this. Let me know if I'm applying this right :hopmad:

[Jocko]

OK so I'm just reading a little bit because I woke up too early this morning. On the nightstand I have Carl Childress' book, 151 Ways to Ruin A Baseball Game. I received it last week with the BRD and I consider this a lighter read than some of the other books and manuals I have on my winter reading list. Back to my point On pages 32-33 situation 18, Cancel a run improperly, the second to last paragraph states, "In spite of those third-world plays, though, the major rules that govern scoring are simple. No run may score if the third out is made by:

a runner being forced out.

the batter-runner before he reaches first safely.

a previous runner called out on appeal for missing a base."

So now if I'm applying what he's saying to the OP correctly, I have to change my opinion and say the run does not score because of a previous runner called out on an appeal for missing a base that would be the third out. Time play or force play is doesn't seem to matter. I'm certainly no expert but I would love to get a correct ruling on this. Let me know if I'm applying this right

see post #24 by THE rules guru, and post #34 by THE FREAKING UMPSCHOOL!!! Can't believe all this discussion after HWUS laid it out. :shakehead:

[Birdieseeker]

Jocko, thanks for the references. I have read this thread from start to finish. Until I read the passage I quoted in Carl's book I was totally in agreement with the posts you pointed out. My question was, how am I applying what Carl wrote wrong? There's something I have to be missing.

[umpschool]

Jocko, thanks for the references. I have read this thread from start to finish. Until I read the passage I quoted in Carl's book I was totally in agreement with the posts you pointed out. My question was, how am I applying what Carl wrote wrong? There's something I have to be missing.

If we're still talking about the same thing (and I'm not sure we are), in the OP, R3 is the "previous" runner that the rule speaks about. R1 is a following runner to R3 and a preceding runner to the BR.

[Richvee]

No run may score if the third out is made by:

a runner being forced out.

R1 (on appeal) was not forced for the 3rd out because BR was thrown out before R1 reached 2nd.

the batter-runner before he reaches first safely.

This was the 2nd out, not the 3rd

a previous runner called out on appeal for missing a base."

R3 is the previous runner. R1 and BR are following runners.

Hope that helps

[Birdieseeker]

Jocko, thanks for the references. I have read this thread from start to finish. Until I read the passage I quoted in Carl's book I was totally in agreement with the posts you pointed out. My question was, how am I applying what Carl wrote wrong? There's something I have to be missing.

If we're still talking about the same thing (and I'm not sure we are), in the OP, R3 is the "previous" runner that the rule speaks about. R1 is a following runner to R3 and a preceding runner to the BR.

Perfect, thank you, that clears it up for me. I was taking R1 as a previous runner not a following runner. That's how I was applying what Carl had written wrong. I knew I had to be missing something important. Just trying to get better at this. Thanks again and Merry Christmas all

Call strikes...Pat

[Haid D' Salaami]

here birdseeker.. the letter R is the runner and the # is the base he is on at the time of pitch..

example..

R2 would be on 2nd.... R3 on 3rd base.. BR is the Batter...

pretty simple.. NFHS has this backward....

[guitarplaya2007]

Let me clarify a few things before I say anything... Is this a day or night game? Is this before or after the seventh inning stretch? In all seriousness though HWUS explained the ruling quite clearly. The only clairification needed form the op is whether or not R1 had passed second base before the out on the BR was made or after the out was made.

[AZump78]

..sigh...

Becker is spot on. Was the runner (still) being forced to the base AT THE MOMENT HE MISSED THE TOUCH. If so, no runs, if not, time play.

Clear as mud?