Dropped 3rd strike

[Wiggledoc]

Here is the scenario: batter swings at strike 3. Ball is dropped. Catcher throws the ball into right field. Batter, now runner advances to 2nd. He sees that RF has trouble with the ball and goes to third. He slides safely into 3rd. Player tags him after he is on the base. Now here is the question: if the batter misses first, and no one but the umpire sees it, at the point the runner is tagged out is he out, or does the opposing coach need to appeal? The umpire sees that the batter hasn't successfully reached 1st, so is he out? It is a continuation of the dropped 3rd strike, so the tag at 3rd would be just like a tag by the catcher.

Thoughts.

[Thunderheads]

Defense must appeal .....

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk 2

[JaxRolo]

Needs to be appealed. A tag at at 3rd is not an appeal unless they tell you they are appealing.

[Mike Prince]

Agree it needs to be appealed, the tag without an appeal is not just like F2 tagging the BR on a D3K.

[James Walker]

+4

And welcome.

[mstaylor]

They have to make it known they are appealing, but then the tag is enough. Many coaches think it has to go to the mound, step off, then throw to first. Way too many things that can go wrong with that. 

[noumpere]

A batter who has passed a base is assumed to have touched it until and unless the defense appeals (excpet in whatever state it is where the umpire calls the runner out in HS ball).

 

So, in your play the runner passed first and the play at third is just a play at third and its not an appeal unless theres more than you mention.

[UmpJM]

South Carolina.

 

JM

[Wiggledoc]

Thanks all. It came up in a game Monday, and it made me wonder. In the case Monday, the runner was called out on a tag, but I wondered if the ump could call him out there for missing first as described.

I had seen it come up with a runner missing 2nd, but never 1st on the dropped strike. I guess the situation would be the same if it were just a batted ball and the throw was punted.

[mstaylor]

Wiggledoc, the runner could have been put out on the tag at third, then they could go back and get the advantageous fourth out. The only reason to do that is to kill a run. It can be argued that you can't call the runner out twice. Two different plays, one is a time play, the other a BR at first. 

[BalkHawk]

.

[maven]

Wiggledoc, the runner could have been put out on the tag at third, then they could go back and get the advantageous fourth out. The only reason to do that is to kill a run. It can be argued that you can't call the runner out twice. Two different plays, one is a time play, the other a BR at first. 

 

I would not put it this way, which reinforces the impression that you're calling a runner out twice.

 

Rather, we should say that the out at 1B supersedes the out at 3B. A "fourth out" has always been merely apparent, as no team really gets four outs in their half inning.

[mstaylor]

It has to phrased that way to show you can have opportunity to get an advantageous fourth out even with the same runner. Because the initial out is a time play, the appeal is a force out it would negate the run.