How Many Runs Score?

[24sdad]

Agree with noumpere.  If the first appeal would have went to 2nd (two outs) then to first (3rd out) no runs would have scored.  However, since the first appeal went to first, it in effect made the second appeal at second a "time play" allowing the runs to score.

[Jimurray]

Agree with noumpere.  If the first appeal would have went to 2nd (two outs) then to first (3rd out) no runs would have scored.  However, since the first appeal went to first, it in effect made the second appeal at second a "time play" allowing the runs to score.

I think Manny can come up with a Wendelstedt cite that says "if a force existed at the time of the miss it is a force when appealed."

So in OBR no runs score. The order of appeals does matter when there is a non forced miss and a forced or 1B miss.

I'm not sure how the other codes rule.

[grayhawk]

I'm not Manny, but did find this in the 2011 WUM on page 222:

 

P356: R1, R3, one out, no count.  The batter knocks the first pitch into the corner.  R3 and R1 score easily on the play. and the BR is called safe on a close play at second base.  R1 misses second base on his way past it, and the BR misses first base.  After the play has ended, the defense first appeals the BR at first base for the second out, and then appeals R1 at second base for the third out.

 

Ruling: R1 is out on appeal for the third out.  Even though a following runner was put out before the appeal was made, no runs can score because this third out is a force out.  Since R1 was forced to advance to second when he passed the bag, any appeal on him at this base is a force play appeal for the third out.  No Run scores.  Note: Had the defense appealed R1 first, then the BR, the same results would occur.

 

The order of appeals is only relevant when one appeal is not a force, and another one is a force (or the BR missing first base).  In the WUM reference play above, if R1 missed third instead of second, then the order of appeals would matter.  If BR's miss was appealed first, and then R1 was appealed for missing third base, then R3's run would still score because the third out was not a force.  If the force was in effect at the time of the miss, then it's always a force, if appealed.  A following runner being called out on appeal does not remove the force on the appeal of the preceding runner.

[noumpere]

Im pretty sure other experts disagree. 

[Jimurray]

I'm pretty sure JR agrees with Wendelstedt. What other experts do you reference in OBR. FED and NCAA have some confusing rulings and probably differ from OBR.

[grayhawk]

I'm pretty sure JR agrees with Wendelstedt. What other experts do you reference in OBR. FED and NCAA have some confusing rulings and probably differ from OBR.

 

I didn't see anything in MLBUM.  I don't have PBUC, but it could be addressed there.  I would certainly welcome other interps.

[ricka56]

From the BRD (old ed.) Appeals: Order of :The order of appeals does matter in Fed and PBUC OFF INTERP 20-12 concurs. The BRD play is this play.

[Jimurray]

The BRD references are from aroun 2000. The only play he references is a non force - force order of appeal. Be interesting to see what he says in the new BRD.

[Texas Manny]

I'm not Steve, but...

 

From the Wendelstedt Umpire School Rules & Interpretations Manual, pg 167, SS 8.4.3.B (II) - Appeals of Missed Forced Bases:

 

If at the moment a runner misses a base, he was forced to touch it by reason of the batter becoming a runner, it will be a force out upon appeal, even if a following runner is put out during the play or on appeal subsequent to the miss of the base.

 

(End of Wendelstedt)

 

 

No runs would score because the 3rd out was an appeal of R1 not touching second to which he was forced. The appeal on the BR not touching first being upheld does not negate the force on R1 at second. No run shall score when the BR is the third out at first base or the third out was a force.

[ricka56]

The BRD references are from aroun 2000. The only play he references is a non force - force order of appeal. Be interesting to see what he says in the new BRD.

That's right...I read too fast...BRD play was not this play.

[mstaylor]

noumpere, there was an extensive discussion about order of appeals on Eteamz years ago. Back then the big interp references were BRD, PBUC/NAPBL, JEA and J/R. Almost nobody had access to the MLBUM. 

[Jimurray]

noumpere, there was an extensive discussion about order of appeals on Eteamz years ago. Back then the big interp references were BRD, PBUC/NAPBL, JEA and J/R. Almost nobody had access to the MLBUM.

MLBUM and PBUC books won't be of any help. Maybe a phone call or email to their experts might, and then we would also have to call FED and NCAA experts.

[mstaylor]

I don't think there is a need to check anything. With both appeals being forces then order doesn't matter, with a force and a nonforce then it does. If you think further clarification needs to be sought I can certainly do that. 

[Jimurray]

I don't think there is a need to check anything. With both appeals being forces then order doesn't matter, with a force and a nonforce then it does. If you think further clarification needs to be sought I can certainly do that.

I think FED and/or NCAA might be different.

[mstaylor]

OK, I will check it out.

[mstaylor]

NCAA 8-6 AR: If the defense will make more than one appeal the defense must appeal in the correct order unless it is an advantageous "fourth out" appeal.

According to BRD, Fed is the same.

[Texas Manny]

NCAA 8-6 AR: If the defense will make more than one appeal the defense must appeal in the correct order unless it is an advantageous "fourth out" appeal.

According to BRD, Fed is the same.

In response to MSTaylor's NCAA 8-6 AR:

 

From the Wendelstedt Umpire School Rules & Interpretations Manual, Pg 168, SSS 8.4.3.E - Apparent Fourth Outs (Additional Third Outs)

 

After the thrid out has been made, the defense may continue to make appeals on runners for missing bases or for not properly tagging up. They may replace any of these outs with the third out if it is advantageous in preventing runs from scoring [7.10(D)].

 

This is not the case if the appeals make for exactly three outs. if multiple appeals are made which only create three outs, the defense is restricted by the order in which they appeal.

 

End of Wendelstedt

 

 

NCAA 2013 and 2014 Rules, pg 70, SS. 8.6.B.9, AR:

 

(9) If there are two outs before the appeal on a runner, the appeal becoming the third out, no runners following the appealed out shall score, and if the appeal is a force out, no runners preceding or following the appealed out shall score (see Rule 2 – Force Play).

 

A.R.—If the defense will make more than one appeal, the defense must appeal in the correct order unless it is an advantageous “fourth out†appeal.

 

End of NCAA.

 

 

It does not appear that the NCAA code contradicts the OBR Interpretation of force application in appeals. The end result would be the same: NO RUNS SCORE.

[Jimurray]

 

NCAA 8-6 AR: If the defense will make more than one appeal the defense must appeal in the correct order unless it is an advantageous "fourth out" appeal.

According to BRD, Fed is the same.

In response to MSTaylor's NCAA 8-6 AR:

 

From the Wendelstedt Umpire School Rules & Interpretations Manual, Pg 168, SSS 8.4.3.E - Apparent Fourth Outs (Additional Third Outs)

 

After the thrid out has been made, the defense may continue to make appeals on runners for missing bases or for not properly tagging up. They may replace any of these outs with the third out if it is advantageous in preventing runs from scoring [7.10(D)].

 

This is not the case if the appeals make for exactly three outs. if multiple appeals are made which only create three outs, the defense is restricted by the order in which they appeal.

 

End of Wendelstedt

 

 

NCAA 2013 and 2014 Rules, pg 70, SS. 8.6.B.9, AR:

 

(9) If there are two outs before the appeal on a runner, the appeal becoming the third out, no runners following the appealed out shall score, and if the appeal is a force out, no runners preceding or following the appealed out shall score (see Rule 2 – Force Play).

 

A.R.—If the defense will make more than one appeal, the defense must appeal in the correct order unless it is an advantageous “fourth out†appeal.

 

End of NCAA.

 

 

It does not appear that the NCAA code contradicts the OBR Interpretation of force application in appeals. The end result would be the same: NO RUNS SCORE.

 

 

The NCAA wording does not contradict OBR but they might want the correct order applied to two force play appeals as well as a non force - force appeal.

[noumpere]

 

 

From the Wendelstedt Umpire School Rules & Interpretations Manual, Pg 168, SSS 8.4.3.E - Apparent Fourth Outs (Additional Third Outs)

 

After the thrid out has been made, the defense may continue to make appeals on runners for missing bases or for not properly tagging up. They may replace any of these outs with the third out if it is advantageous in preventing runs from scoring [7.10(D)].

 

This is not the case if the appeals make for exactly three outs. if multiple appeals are made which only create three outs, the defense is restricted by the order in which they appeal.

 

End of Wendelstedt

 

 

 

 

Im confused (again!)  Doesn't this contradict the previous Wendelstadt intperp where the order didn't matter wit the R1 R3 and BR missing first and R1 missing second for the second and third outs (in some order)?

[Texas Manny]

 

 

 

From the Wendelstedt Umpire School Rules & Interpretations Manual, Pg 168, SSS 8.4.3.E - Apparent Fourth Outs (Additional Third Outs)

 

After the thrid out has been made, the defense may continue to make appeals on runners for missing bases or for not properly tagging up. They may replace any of these outs with the third out if it is advantageous in preventing runs from scoring [7.10(D)].

 

This is not the case if the appeals make for exactly three outs. if multiple appeals are made which only create three outs, the defense is restricted by the order in which they appeal.

 

End of Wendelstedt

 

 

 

 

Im confused (again!)  Doesn't this contradict the previous Wendelstadt intperp where the order didn't matter wit the R1 R3 and BR missing first and R1 missing second for the second and third outs (in some order)?

 

Wendelstedt 8.3.4.E., applies only when the appeals require recognition of a fourth out. If the appeals process creates the 2nd and 3rd outs, to close the inning, then as the last statement says, 8.4.3.E will not apply.

[noumpere]

edit:

 

still confused.

 

in wendelstedts play in post 28, the appeals create the second and third out.  Not the fourth out.  So the order matters according to the above.  Which is ionconsistent with the ruling in that paly.

 

Im going to bed.

[Texas Manny]

So then you and Wendelstedt agree that in the play presented above that no runs score?  isn't that what I said?

You got it. NO RUNS SCORE!

 

Yay! We agree!

[Jimurray]

"This is not the case if the appeals make for exactly three outs. if multiple appeals are made which only create three outs, the defense is restricted by the order in which they appeal."

What this is saying is that if a non force is appealed for the THIRD out, they can still appeal a force/1B appeal for the Fourth out and no runs can score. If however, the force/1B appeal is made for the second out and a non force appeal is made for the third out, that order will matter and runs can score. When two force appeals are made for the second and third out the order won't matter.