Did I rule correctly on this?

[ump570]

I was working tournament today. F1 throws pitch which is ball 4 and rolls into dead ball territory in a hole in the fence under backstop. I awarded the runner second base since he was already entitled to first because of the walk. Was I correct?

[BRUMP]

A pitch (or any throw from the rubber) out of play is 1 base TOP. OBR 7.05i If the batter becomes a runner on a wild pitch which entitles the runners to advance one base, the batter-runner shall be entitled to first base only.

[ump570]

So I was wrong?

I was working tournament today. F1 throws pitch which is ball 4 and rolls into dead ball territory in a hole in the fence under backstop. I awarded the runner second base since he was already entitled to first because of the walk. Was I correct?

I should have specified. I awarded BR second.

[BRUMP]

You should've only awarded 1b.

[jkumpire]

Call the coach of the kid you gave 2 bases to, tell him to give one back or you will charge him a late fee.... or send him an invoce for the gift he receieved

[maven]

You should've only awarded 1b.

 

Or: he can have 2 bases, but they're both 1B.

 

Awards are not cumulative.

[noumpere]

I was working tournament today. F1 throws pitch which is ball 4 and rolls into dead ball territory in a hole in the fence under backstop. I awarded the runner second base since he was already entitled to first because of the walk. Was I correct?

I'm not trying to pile on here (really) but Im curious as to how you arrived at this conclusion.  You've been told its incorrect but Im more interested in how things like this get started or what the thought process is on it.

 

I mean, I can see how the rule *might be* one-plus-one but given that you didn't know either way, what lead you to believe it most likely was that instead of just first?

[ump570]

Well, I thought that since the runner was already entitled to first base by virtue of the pitch being ball 4, that the award was one base from the base he was already entitled to. I knew it was one base, but I overthought the rule and gave him second. Whoops. Won't happen again.

[Dragon29]

Ump570,

 

Remembering this:

Awards are not cumulative.

 

will help you avoid this same mistake in the future.

[blue23ll]

If it had not been ball 4, would you have awarded the batter 1st base too?

[umpire_scott]

If it had not been ball 4, would you have awarded the batter 1st base too?

 

Wouldn't they be able to "bank" that base?  Then if he ended up walking he could just take second.  If he doubled then he would get third.

 

Seriously I can see me doing this same thing a few years ago.  There are so many rules to remember that I often found myself applying rules at incorrect times.

[ump570]

If it had not been ball 4, would you have awarded the batter 1st base too?

Of course not. But in my mind there seemed to be a distinction. My mistake.