$100 Challenge

[UmpireFever]

So with the OP, im assuming that the B/R failed to touch first which is a violation of the rules. The defense legally appealed to first.

According to OBR an Appeal is "the act of a fielder in claiming violation of the rules by the offensive team."

The last part of rule 7.10 "appeal plays may Require an umpire to recognize an apparent fourth out. If the third out is made during the play in which an appeal play is sustained on another runner, the appeal play decision takes precedence in determining the out. If there is more than one appeal in a play that end a half inning, the defense may elect to take the out that gives it the advantage.

I don't see where the problem is. The batter runner failed to touch first base. The defense legally appealed. Three outs. No runs.

[MidAmUmp]

Jason, I get that. The question that I posed is what basis per the rules, are there that support this particular interpretation? My stand is that there is no rule support. It is simply an interpretation based on opinion not rules. I would love to see the rule that supports this, hence the debate.

I guess I don't understand why there is confusion or that there is no rule support for this interp.  The B/R didn't reach 1st base.  The bases were loaded.  The defense didn't leave the field after the 3rd out was made.  The defense appealed (or whatever the hell you want to call it).  The force was not removed.  B/R was called out for failing to touch 1st.  That is an advantageous 4th out (or whatever the hell you want to call it).  No run can score when the 3rd out (or in this case an advantageous 4th out - recognized as such in the NCAA rule book on pages 79 & 80) is a force out.

 

Is there an actual rule that says all of that?  No, but there are several rules that say specific parts of it and as with other rule enforcement, you have to piece the puzzle together to get your complete answer.

 

You're making this a hell of a lot harder than it really is.

[Haid D' Salaami]

1 problem is.. this is not a force out at 1st...and this question was on the test about 3 yrs ago. the run will score, cause the book doesnt see this as an appeal of the 4th out. since the 3rd out was already recorded earlier.

[MidAmUmp]

 this is not a force out at 1st

the run will score, cause the book doesnt see this as an appeal of the 4th out. since the 3rd out was already recorded earlier.

You're going to have to explain these statements.  What are you and Troy seeing that I'm not???  Granted I've been looking at this computer screen all day and feel like I'm going blind and my mind is mush, but we're obviously not on the same page about something.

[UmpTTS43]

What rule requires that the BR touch first after 3 outs are attained? There isn't one.

The rule cited in the NCAA rulebook says that if there are 2 outs and the 3rd out is an appeal that is upheld on a forced runner or the BR attaining first legally then no runs score. It says nothing about this situation where the BR did not attain first AFTER three outs have been made.

Until tomorrow.

[Richvee]

Just thinking out loud.. Let's change the OP a little. Let's say the BR doesn't get hurt, rounds 1st, misses the bag, and is between 1st &  2nd when R2 is thrown out @home. Then the defense appeals @1st. We would all agree that's an advantageous 4th out and no run scores?  

 

I understand one is an appeal, and the OP is a "put out" for lack of a better term. Either way, BR never touched first. I have a hard time seeing how a run scores one way and not the other. 

[zm1283]

What rule requires that the BR touch first after 3 outs are attained? There isn't one.

The rule cited in the NCAA rulebook says that if there are 2 outs and the 3rd out is an appeal that is upheld on a forced runner or the BR attaining first legally then no runs score. It says nothing about this situation where the BR did not attain first AFTER three outs have been made.

Until tomorrow.

 

This was my main hang-up with the question.  I have been working on the test and I have about five questions marked that I'm not sure about and this is definitely one of them.

 

What if the B/R just stops running before he gets to first and the third out is made?  Is there a rule that says he has to go all the way to first to avoid being the advantageous 4th out?  Nothing to my knowledge says he has to touch first base.  I have a feeling that we're all just taking our chances on the test with this one because who knows what the NCAA wants.  

[Texas Manny]

Rule 2.00: An APPEAL is the act of a fielder in claiming violation of the rules by the offensive team.

 

Rule 7.10: (b) With the ball in play, while advancing or returning to a base, he fails to touch each base in order before he, or a missed base, is tagged.

 

Rule 7.10 AR: Appeal plays may require an umpire to recognize an apparent fourth out. If the third out is made during a play in which an appeal play is sustained on another runner, the appeal play decision takes precedence in determining the out. If there is more than one appeal during a play that ends a half-inning, the defense may elect to take the out that gives it the advantage. For the purpose of this rule, the defensive team has left the field when the pitcher and all infielders have left fair territory on their way to the bench or clubhouse.

 

By looking at the face value of the rules, and in the spirit, the failure of the BR to touch first base is a violation of the rules. He is required to go to first, where he would be declared safe by the umpire, reaches safely on a hit, error, award, or other reason, or is declared out for having been tagged, forced, or declared out by the umpire by other rule, or out on appeal.

 

7.10 allows the defense to appeal provided they say it is an appeal and they execute it properly by throwing to the offended base, or tagging the individual appealed on. Since this would be a fourth out, the umpire may need to recognize the fourth out, and because the BR was put out before touching 1st for the third out, no run may score, Rule 4.09(1).

 

7.10B allows two conditions: He fails to touch each base in order before he is tagged, and he fails to touch each base in order before the missed base is tagged. In your play, they tag the BR directly.

 

Three outs no runs (If you follow all of this easy to read logic).

 

 

Jim Evans concurs

Harry's manual disagrees

MLBUM says nothing on it.

PBUC says nothing on it.

 

I recognize the BR being tagged, it is advantageous for the defense to nullify the run through the running violation, 4.09, and no runs score. The BR violated the rules. He didn't run to first as required by rule, even though he got injured. Tough noogies. Three outs. NO RUNS SCORE.

 

I don't see how you can just ignore the BR's running voilation because the apparent 3rd out was made at home. Not running to first after a ball is hit is a rule violation and can be appealed. (5.04, 5.06)

[MidAmUmp]

Just thinking out loud.. Let's change the OP a little. Let's say the BR doesn't get hurt, rounds 1st, misses the bag, and is between 1st &  2nd when R2 is thrown out @home. Then the defense appeals @1st. We would all agree that's an advantageous 4th out and no run scores?  

 

I understand one is an appeal, and the OP is a "put out" for lack of a better term. Either way, BR never touched first. I have a hard time seeing how a run scores one way and not the other. 

I believe this is where they are getting their interpretation.  Granted, this is a 3rd world play for a player to be injured and never reaching 1st base.  I think we can all agree that on 3rd world plays you just have to umpire.  There wasn't a "That's nothing" on the books in the Red Sox/Reds World Series back in the 70's.  He just umpired, ruled it incidental contact and the rest is history...

 

My gut says their interp. is: regardless of injury and never reaching first or missing 1st base while rounding the bases, the requirement remains - no run can score if the 3rd out (or apparent/advantageous 4th out) is a force out.

 

Again, you can call it an appeal, you can call it an advantageous 4th out, you can call it a $hi1house mess.  The fact remains that the B/R has failed to remove the force for whatever reason.

 

Disregard all the other not so relevant information and get down to the bare facts.  In the NCAA scenario, the only relevant fact is the B/R didn't touch first before the 3rd out occurred.  In the other what if scenario (missed 1st, on his way to 2nd), the only relevant fact is the B/R didn't touch first before the 3rd out occurred.  In both scenarios the force is still intact due to the B/R's failure to touch 1st base, and in both scenarios the B/R is in jeopardy of being called out if the defense appeals this fact properly before leaving the field.

 

In my opinion, the rule Troy is failing to find is 8-5-j-A.R. 1 on page 77 of the NCAA book.  While I do agree it does not require a B/R to continue running to 1st base after the 3rd out is recorded per se, it does require it if all runners are forced and involves a scoring play when you factor in the recognition of the 4th out.

 

I could be completely wrong on this.  It wouldn't be the first time, but common sense tells me to recognize the 4th out and take the runs off the board.  I'll await to hear Mike's response since he's also attended Harry's much more recently than I, and perhaps he can shed some light on their apparent change in interpretation from when I was there.

[conbo61]

This is why I love this site.

[JaxRolo]

Just thinking out loud.. Let's change the OP a little. Let's say the BR doesn't get hurt, rounds 1st, misses the bag, and is between 1st & 2nd when R2 is thrown out @home. Then the defense appeals @1st. We would all agree that's an advantageous 4th out and no run scores?

I understand one is an appeal, and the OP is a "put out" for lack of a better term. Either way, BR never touched first. I have a hard time seeing how a run scores one way and not the other.

I'm with you and Jason on this. Don't see a difference.

Until someone has a valid rule vote that it's is not then no run scores.

[Thunderheads]

what's funny is ..........regardless of where you stand on this play, ...... YOUR INTERPRETATION on the field will stand, and NO COACH ANYWHERE will know any different

[BigUmpire]

what's funny is ..........regardless of where you stand on this play, ...... YOUR INTERPRETATION on the field will stand, and NO COACH ANYWHERE will know any different

BEST answer yet!

Jeff knows!

[Thunderheads]

 

what's funny is ..........regardless of where you stand on this play, ...... YOUR INTERPRETATION on the field will stand, and NO COACH ANYWHERE will know any different

BEST answer yet!

Jeff knows!

 

LOL ....

It doesn't mean that I don't think the umpire should get this right, and I'm interested to see where this goes .....but at the end of the day, .... I am right

[conbo61]

 

 

what's funny is ..........regardless of where you stand on this play, ...... YOUR INTERPRETATION on the field will stand, and NO COACH ANYWHERE will know any different

BEST answer yet!

Jeff knows!

 

LOL ....

It doesn't mean that I don't think the umpire should get this right, and I'm interested to see where this goes .....but at the end of the day, .... I am right

 

 

I have to try this line with SWMBO...

[JaxRolo]

what's funny is ..........regardless of where you stand on this play, ...... YOUR INTERPRETATION on the field will stand, and NO COACH ANYWHERE will know any different

I agree. But It will be much easier to explain to a coach about the appeal play getting the out. Than explaining to a coach why they can't appeal a runner not touching a base.

[BigUmpire]

Umpire bumper stickers for Jeffs post:

• “I may not always be right but I am always confident." – mstaylor
• "You can agree with me or you can be wrong".-BrianC14
• "Coach, we agree to disagree. I'm right and you’re going back to your bench."-therefrump
• “Try to make your explanations five words or lessâ€. -.mstaylor
• “You argue with the umpire because there is nothing else you can do about it.â€-Jaxrolo
• “Often wrong.  Never indecisiveâ€. Noumpere
• “I may not always be right but I am always confident." – mstaylor
• "You don't have to have the last word, because you get the final say."-noumpre
• “Coach, everybody has an opinion, mine counts.â€- Mike Taylor

[Thunderheads]

 

what's funny is ..........regardless of where you stand on this play, ...... YOUR INTERPRETATION on the field will stand, and NO COACH ANYWHERE will know any different

I agree. But It will be much easier to explain to a coach about the appeal play getting the out. Than explaining to a coach why they can't appeal a runner not touching a base.

 

True, but then you'll just have the other coach arguing ......  lose/lose .... you're the umpire, you're wrong, and you're the bad guy

[conbo61]

Well...at the bottom of page 63 of my Jaksa-Roder Manual it says...

"Not an appeal: Bases loaded, two outs.  The batter singles and R2 is thrown out at home for the third out. The batter has been injured and is unable to advance to first, prompting the defense to throw to first against him: this is an advantageous fourth out and supersedes the former third out, and no run can score."

 

The same text appears in my copy (2010), however I find it confusing.  

 

First three words, "Not an appeal"

 

Last part of the last sentence "...this is an advantageous fourth out and supersedes the former third out, and no run can score."

 

Yet the advantageous fourth out can only be granted on an appeal.

 

It appears contradictory.

 

As far as J/R being wrong, or changing, I am sure that ALL manuals (including Wendelstedt) have had revisions or changes.  I would not completely discard either of these references because they have been updated.

[MidAmUmp]

 

Well...at the bottom of page 63 of my Jaksa-Roder Manual it says...

"Not an appeal: Bases loaded, two outs.  The batter singles and R2 is thrown out at home for the third out. The batter has been injured and is unable to advance to first, prompting the defense to throw to first against him: this is an advantageous fourth out and supersedes the former third out, and no run can score."

 

The same text appears in my copy (2010), however I find it confusing.  

 

First three words, "Not an appeal"

 

Last part of the last sentence "...this is an advantageous fourth out and supersedes the former third out, and no run can score."

 

Yet the advantageous fourth out can only be granted on an appeal.

 

It appears contradictory.

 

As far as J/R being wrong, or changing, I am sure that ALL manuals (including Wendelstedt) have had revisions or changes.  I would not completely discard either of these references because they have been updated.

 

I don't have my J/R manual with me this morning.  I burned it last night since it's no longer relevant .  However, I thought it was confusing last night when I read it, but when I read all the scenarios it made sense.

 

You know, the CCA manual has a major mistake in it this year in 4-man.  Front of the book says one thing, the back of the book says the exact opposite.  Maybe Troy will declare it irrelevant today.  Stay tuned...

 

And hopefully Troy knows me slamming his ass is all in jest...maybe.

[Mike Prince]

what's funny is ..........regardless of where you stand on this play, ...... YOUR INTERPRETATION on the field will stand, and NO COACH ANYWHERE will know any different

 

There's still the coach who will appeal anything he thinks can give him an advantage (whether valid or not), and some coaches I know have a designated bench player or assistant in the dugout with specific duties to watch for missed bases and stuff behind a play.  I get the spirit of your post, but there are some coaches who will catch this (whether through knowledge or dumb luck), so it's our job to be on top of it.

 

This thread is fascinating by the way.  Some of our best members having a spirited debate, love it.

[Thunderheads]

Rule 2.00: An APPEAL is the act of a fielder in claiming violation of the rules by the offensive team.

 

Rule 7.10: (b) With the ball in play, while advancing or returning to a base, he fails to touch each base in order before he, or a missed base, is tagged.

 

Rule 7.10 AR: Appeal plays may require an umpire to recognize an apparent fourth out. If the third out is made during a play in which an appeal play is sustained on another runner, the appeal play decision takes precedence in determining the out. If there is more than one appeal during a play that ends a half-inning, the defense may elect to take the out that gives it the advantage. For the purpose of this rule, the defensive team has left the field when the pitcher and all infielders have left fair territory on their way to the bench or clubhouse.

 

By looking at the face value of the rules, and in the spirit, the failure of the BR to touch first base is a violation of the rules. He is required to go to first, where he would be declared safe by the umpire, reaches safely on a hit, error, award, or other reason, or is declared out for having been tagged, forced, or declared out by the umpire by other rule, or out on appeal.

 

7.10 allows the defense to appeal provided they say it is an appeal and they execute it properly by throwing to the offended base, or tagging the individual appealed on. Since this would be a fourth out, the umpire may need to recognize the fourth out, and because the BR was put out before touching 1st for the third out, no run may score, Rule 4.09(1).

 

7.10B allows two conditions: He fails to touch each base in order before he is tagged, and he fails to touch each base in order before the missed base is tagged. In your play, they tag the BR directly.

 

Three outs no runs (If you follow all of this easy to read logic).

 

 

Jim Evans concurs

Harry's manual disagrees

MLBUM says nothing on it.

PBUC says nothing on it.

 

I recognize the BR being tagged, it is advantageous for the defense to nullify the run through the running violation, 4.09, and no runs score. The BR violated the rules. He didn't run to first as required by rule, even though he got injured. Tough noogies. Three outs. NO RUNS SCORE.

 

I don't see how you can just ignore the BR's running voilation because the apparent 3rd out was made at home. Not running to first after a ball is hit is a rule violation and can be appealed. (5.04, 5.06)

This is a great break-down however ...........7.10 won't apply to the B/R, because he hasn't aqcuired first base yet, ... he's still the 'batter' ......  yes?

[Thunderheads]

 

what's funny is ..........regardless of where you stand on this play, ...... YOUR INTERPRETATION on the field will stand, and NO COACH ANYWHERE will know any different

 

There's still the coach who will appeal anything he thinks can give him an advantage (whether valid or not), and some coaches I know have a designated bench player or assistant in the dugout with specific duties to watch for missed bases and stuff behind a play.  I get the spirit of your post, but there are some coaches who will catch this (whether through knowledge or dumb luck), so it's our job to be on top of it.

 

This thread is fascinating by the way.  Some of our best members having a spirited debate, love it.

 

True, very true.

 

But YOUR interpretation of who scores, or doesn't score, etc, etc will stand, and the true RULING / RULES knowledge will be missed by said coach, or bench player, etc.  They may see a missed base, or the better didn't aquire first, but where does it go from there?

 

TOTALLY agree, ...this is a good one, and fun to watch the progress....

[Thunderheads]

maybe we need to work 4.09 in here

4.09 HOW A TEAM SCORES.

(a) One run shall be scored each time a runner legally advances to and touches first,

second, third and home base before three men are put out to end the inning.

EXCEPTION: A run is not scored if the runner advances to home base during a

play in which the third out is made (1) by the batter-runner before he touches first

base; (2) by any runner being forced out; or (3) by a preceding runner who is

declared out because he failed to touch one of the bases.

[zm1283]

I could be way wrong here, but I would be SHOCKED if a college player in the dugout who is in charge of missed bases/runners leaving early, etc caught this and told a coach to appeal it.  I just don't see a player who doesn't really know the rules being able to think quickly enough on his feet.  There might be a few coaches who would figure it out, but I think they're even in the vast minority.