$100 Challenge

[UmpireFever]

How are you going to allow a run to score, when a player hits the single, never leaves the box or touches first base.

In my opinion there's not much common sense and FairPlay involved if your allowing the run to score.

[Richvee]

How are you going to allow a run to score, when a player hits the single, never leaves the box or touches first base.

 

Did you read the OP? Because the inning ended on a 3rd out at the plate, and BR was not thrown out.  so the preceding run counts. 

[Haid D' Salaami]

 

 

So what is the difference between the batter not running to first...

and the batter running to first and missing first on his way to second...

You cannot miss a base until you pass it.

You cannot grant a missed base appeal without a missed base.

maven

Didn't he miss the base he was forced to run to?

 

He wasnt forced to run to 1st.. problem #1

[Haid D' Salaami]

 

ok.. I just got a answer from Harry's.....the run scores...this is not the apparent 4th out sit.

Uh, we all knew that's what Harry thinks. And most of us agree with it. But FED and NCAA and JR aficionados believe differently. The NCAA question this year will probably be correct if you rule the run doesn't score. They want to rule one way, OBR rules another way, Carl says, I hope this doesn't happen to you in your game.

 

Carl is not a rules god, or a governing body, just someone who wrote a few books.. no disrespect.

[afaber12]

How are you going to allow a run to score, when a player hits the single, never leaves the box or touches first base.

In my opinion there's not much common sense and FairPlay involved if your allowing the run to score.

 

You're right in that there's not much common sense: why attempt the close, tough play on the runner trying to score from second, when the batter is apparently standing there admiring the beauty of his hit. If I'm the catcher I'm going in front of the line and catching the ball out in front, and then either tag the batter or if he's started moving make the play at first the same way I would for a dropped third strike. (I'd use "uncaught" third strike", but in this I'm a catcher who uses the less accurate terminology.)

 

Should the runner, and by extension his team, be penalised for stopping his attempt to reach first because the third out has been called? No. Are you going to suddenly grant appeals for "missed" bases at the base in question that runners are attempting to advance to when not forced? No. (And if for some reason you are, what if the runner stops trying to advance and starts to retreat before the appeal is made?) Then on what grounds are you going to wave off the run.

 

A fourth out can only be an appeal, and the situation described doesn't meet the requirements for an appeal.

[ricka56]

 

I think this challenge might be a fool’s errand...and I certainly am fool enough to take it....Holy crap there is 6 pages on this thread in less than 2 day...nice. I'm late to the party, but here’s my shot.  

 

Common Sense/Spirit of the game argument- it is obvious that the rule makers wanted to include an advantage fourth out in baseball. Getting hung up on whether a tag of 1B prior to BR reaching is an appeal or not is (IMO) not what the rule makers intended.

 

Rule application argument – even if you insist that an advantageous fourth out must be an appeal, I think you can get there.

1. 2.00 Definition of terms ... An APPEAL is the act of a fielder in claiming violation of the rules by the offensive team. Some seem to think that there is a small set of rules that can be appealed. I think that set of rules is larger than some think and it can include failure to reach 1B before it is tagged.
2. 7.10 Any runner shall be called out, on appeal, when...(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.  Touching each base in order starts with the requirement to touch the first one.

 

So I believe that even if you want be a letter-of-the-law stickler and require an appeal for an advantageous fourth out, there is common sense, spirit of the game, and rule application support to disallow the run to score.   

[afaber12]

 

I think this challenge might be a fool’s errand...and I certainly am fool enough to take it....Holy crap there is 6 pages on this thread in less than 2 day...nice. I'm late to the party, but here’s my shot.  

 

Common Sense/Spirit of the game argument- it is obvious that the rule makers wanted to include an advantage fourth out in baseball. Getting hung up on whether a tag of 1B prior to BR reaching is an appeal or not is (IMO) not what the rule makers intended.

 

Rule application argument – even if you insist that an advantageous fourth out must be an appeal, I think you can get there.

1. 2.00 Definition of terms ... An APPEAL is the act of a fielder in claiming violation of the rules by the offensive team. Some seem to think that there is a small set of rules that can be appealed. I think that set of rules is larger than some think and it can include failure to reach 1B before it is tagged.
2. 7.10 Any runner shall be called out, on appeal, when...(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.  Touching each base in order starts with the requirement to touch the first one.

 

So I believe that even if you want be a letter-of-the-law stickler and require an appeal for an advantageous fourth out, there is common sense, spirit of the game, and rule application support to disallow the run to score.   

 

The problem is that as a letter-of-the-law stickler I have to point out that by your highlighting you're showing that you're skipping the key part of "in order". There's been no failure to touch them in order, unless there's now a requirement that to score a run batter's must succeed in touching all four bases in order on the one play before any of the bases that he's not yet touched are tagged and appealed. Because if the OP's situation constitutes a valid cause for a successful appeal under 7.10b, then short of someone hitting either an out-of-the-park or inside-the-park homer, not too many runs will score.

 

Lead-off hitter gets a single to the right-centre alley. F8 throws the ball into F4, who steps on second base and appeals the "missed" base. Unless we've all been operating under a mistaken understanding rules on an enormous scale, this isn't an out. In what possible way has the BR missed second base in this situation? The answer is obviously that he hasn't, any more so than that the BR in the OP has missed first base. When F3 catches the throw from another infielder and is standing on the base before BR gets there, you don't wait for them to make it clear that they're appealing the out at first, he's just out because its not an appeal play.

 

To a certain extent, the nature of what needs to be appealed are situations where someone has - without necessarily intending to - cheated: they've cut a corner to shorten the distance to the next base, or they've left too early on a fly ball in trying to get to the next base as quickly as possible. I can only guess at the intent of the various rule makers that along the way have either first set down or modified the rules of baseball over the years, but it seems like appeals are meant for these "cheating" situations, and only them. Not beating the play at first is the opposite of cheating: in no way has the BR broken the rules by not reaching first before a play is made on him.

 

My guess is if the rule makers had intended for fourth outs to be possible in non-appeal circumstances, they'd have mentioned them else where in the rule book. Outside of the index at the back, there is only one mention of "fourth out" (and the index references all point to this same place as well), and its that appeals might produce a fourth out. I can't find anything that even points to 7.10 in a "if <blank> happens then treat this the same as 7.10" type of way. For a fourth out, its an appeal or bust, and this isn't an appeal.

[Thunderheads]

............and ....................nowhere does it say that someone is required to finish running after the 3rd out .................

 

also, spirit of the game, in my mind would be .........score the run! right?

[JaxRolo]

It seems like those that are on the side of allowing the appeal under 7.10b are missing a key part of the wording:

7.10 Any runner shall be called out, on appeal, when—

(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.

This has to mean that a runner can only be at risk of an appeal under this rule when he's actually touched a base in an improper order: a batter-runner who steps over or around first and then stands on second on a double, or a runner from first who steps on second on the way to third when the ball is caught, and cuts across the diamond back to first without touching second on the way back, these "missed" bases. The batter-runner hasn't run the bases in the wrong order, and as others have mentioned he can't "miss" first base given he hasn't got to it. If you use this to grant an appeal on the OP, you're opening up a lot of other "appeals" that I'm pretty sure shouldn't be allowed.

R1 starts a steal attempt, F2 throws to F4 covering the base. We'd all agree that absent unusual circumstances for R1 to be out he'd have to be tagged with the ball before reaching (or after touching but while not in contact with) the base. If you're willing to uphold the appeal in the OP, then you'd have to be willing to uphold the appeal in this case when F4 catches the throw like an F3 - one foot on the bag, stretching out towards home plate - before R1 slides in. I can imagine that in disagreeing with this someone will point out that the OP is a play on BR forced to first, and that my situation R1 isn't forced. That's true. But where in 7.10b is there any mention of a force? If there's only R2, and he misses third on the way to scoring on BR's hit, he's still at risk of an appeal at third despite not being "forced" to touch third.

I think maybe we're thinking (at least I know I have been) thinking that the runner collapsed somewhere up the line and stopped. What if he's hobbling up the line, and making progress towards first but really slowly. R2's called out at the plate, so BR decides to slow down and peels off towards the dugout. Its a few moments later that someone thinks to ask the question at first base. Would you grant the appeal, given that the BR didn't stop attempting to advance until the third out was called? It seems to me that once the third out is made, the inning is over and no more action can take place with the exception of a possible fourth out appeal, and that such an appeal is for events that took place prior to the third out.

But he didn't advance to 1st base in order!

[Thunderheads]

 

It seems like those that are on the side of allowing the appeal under 7.10b are missing a key part of the wording:

7.10 Any runner shall be called out, on appeal, when—

(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.

This has to mean that a runner can only be at risk of an appeal under this rule when he's actually touched a base in an improper order: a batter-runner who steps over or around first and then stands on second on a double, or a runner from first who steps on second on the way to third when the ball is caught, and cuts across the diamond back to first without touching second on the way back, these "missed" bases. The batter-runner hasn't run the bases in the wrong order, and as others have mentioned he can't "miss" first base given he hasn't got to it. If you use this to grant an appeal on the OP, you're opening up a lot of other "appeals" that I'm pretty sure shouldn't be allowed.

R1 starts a steal attempt, F2 throws to F4 covering the base. We'd all agree that absent unusual circumstances for R1 to be out he'd have to be tagged with the ball before reaching (or after touching but while not in contact with) the base. If you're willing to uphold the appeal in the OP, then you'd have to be willing to uphold the appeal in this case when F4 catches the throw like an F3 - one foot on the bag, stretching out towards home plate - before R1 slides in. I can imagine that in disagreeing with this someone will point out that the OP is a play on BR forced to first, and that my situation R1 isn't forced. That's true. But where in 7.10b is there any mention of a force? If there's only R2, and he misses third on the way to scoring on BR's hit, he's still at risk of an appeal at third despite not being "forced" to touch third.

I think maybe we're thinking (at least I know I have been) thinking that the runner collapsed somewhere up the line and stopped. What if he's hobbling up the line, and making progress towards first but really slowly. R2's called out at the plate, so BR decides to slow down and peels off towards the dugout. Its a few moments later that someone thinks to ask the question at first base. Would you grant the appeal, given that the BR didn't stop attempting to advance until the third out was called? It seems to me that once the third out is made, the inning is over and no more action can take place with the exception of a possible fourth out appeal, and that such an appeal is for events that took place prior to the third out.

 

But he didn't advance to 1st base in order!

 

he didnt' have to , the third out of the inning was made, there's no rule that says he must continue to run ...........

[JaxRolo]

Same could be said about any appeal-able play. An out was already made!

[Thunderheads]

Same could be said about any appeal-able play. An out was already made!

Rolando, I'm not sure why you're bantering on this ..... a runner not reaching first is not appealable......

[JaxRolo]

 

Same could be said about any appeal-able play. An out was already made!

Rolando, I'm not sure why you're bantering on this ..... a runner not reaching first is not appealable......

 

Rule Cite? I have not seen a rule that specifically mentions this.

[Thunderheads]

 

 

Same could be said about any appeal-able play. An out was already made!

Rolando, I'm not sure why you're bantering on this ..... a runner not reaching first is not appealable......

 

Rule Cite? I have not seen a rule that specifically mentions this.

 

already been discussed ..  7.10 .... stop

[conbo61]

It a stunning moment of clarity it clicked. An appeal is only valid on a base running error. In this instance, the B/R did not commit any infraction, he just did not get there "in time." No appeal, therefore no advantageous fourth out.

One more: 2 out, R3 and R2 break with pitch, batter hits a slow roller to F6. R3 scores, F6 charges, fires home and R2 is tagged out. B/R is that big slow kid (you know the one I am talking about). If the catcher then fired to first to nip him, you would not allow that "out" to nullify R3's run.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

[JaxRolo]

It a stunning moment of clarity it clicked. An appeal is only valid on a base running error. In this instance, the B/R did not commit any infraction, he just did not get there "in time." No appeal, therefore no advantageous fourth out.

One more: 2 out, R3 and R2 break with pitch, batter hits a slow roller to F6. R3 scores, F6 charges, fires home and R2 is tagged out. B/R is that big slow kid (you know the one I am talking about). If the catcher then fired to first to nip him, you would not allow that "out" to nullify R3's run.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

No error? He didn't go to first! Sounds like an error to me.

 

 

 

Same could be said about any appeal-able play. An out was already made!

Rolando, I'm not sure why you're bantering on this ..... a runner not reaching first is not appealable......

 

Rule Cite? I have not seen a rule that specifically mentions this.

 

already been discussed ..  7.10 .... stop

 

7.10 is clear as mud which leads to different interpretations.

[conbo61]

It a stunning moment of clarity it clicked. An appeal is only valid on a base running error. In this instance, the B/R did not commit any infraction, he just did not get there "in time." No appeal, therefore no advantageous fourth out.

One more: 2 out, R3 and R2 break with pitch, batter hits a slow roller to F6. R3 scores, F6 charges, fires home and R2 is tagged out. B/R is that big slow kid (you know the one I am talking about). If the catcher then fired to first to nip him, you would not allow that "out" to nullify R3's run.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

No error? He didn't go to first! Sounds like an error to me.

Same could be said about any appeal-able play. An out was already made!

Rolando, I'm not sure why you're bantering on this ..... a runner not reaching first is not appealable......

Rule Cite? I have not seen a rule that specifically mentions this.

already been discussed .. 7.10 .... stop

7.10 is clear as mud which leads to different interpretations.

To me, for an error or infraction, he would have to violate a rule. What rule was violated?

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

[conbo61]

One more case...

What if F2 was a pretty sharp fellow and instead of tagging R2, he ran up the line and tagged the writhing B/R?

That would be the third out and the runs scored by R3 and R2 would be negated.

Correct?

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

[JaxRolo]

One more case...

What if F2 was a pretty sharp fellow and instead of tagging R2, he ran up the line and tagged the writhing B/R?

That would be the third out and the runs scored by R3 and R2 would be negated.

Correct?

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

Yes

[maven]

What if F2 was a pretty sharp fellow and instead of tagging R2, he ran up the line and tagged the writhing B/R?

That would be the third out and the runs scored by R3 and R2 would be negated.

Correct?

 

Yes, because in that case the BR made the third out before reaching 1B, so no runs can score. 4.09

[Thunderheads]

 

It a stunning moment of clarity it clicked. An appeal is only valid on a base running error. In this instance, the B/R did not commit any infraction, he just did not get there "in time." No appeal, therefore no advantageous fourth out.

One more: 2 out, R3 and R2 break with pitch, batter hits a slow roller to F6. R3 scores, F6 charges, fires home and R2 is tagged out. B/R is that big slow kid (you know the one I am talking about). If the catcher then fired to first to nip him, you would not allow that "out" to nullify R3's run.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

No error? He didn't go to first! Sounds like an error to me.

 

Exactly, ...he didn't acquire first, ...he's not on the 'bases' yet, thus can't make a base-running error.

 

Look guys, it's symantics....

 

You have two recent Pro school grads agreeing with "score R3" from the OP .....

[JaxRolo]

It a stunning moment of clarity it clicked. An appeal is only valid on a base running error. In this instance, the B/R did not commit any infraction, he just did not get there "in time." No appeal, therefore no advantageous fourth out.

One more: 2 out, R3 and R2 break with pitch, batter hits a slow roller to F6. R3 scores, F6 charges, fires home and R2 is tagged out. B/R is that big slow kid (you know the one I am talking about). If the catcher then fired to first to nip him, you would not allow that "out" to nullify R3's run.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

No error? He didn't go to first! Sounds like an error to me.

You have two recent Pro school grads agreeing with "score R3" from the OP .....

They don't know nothing!

[Thunderheads]

 

 

 

It a stunning moment of clarity it clicked. An appeal is only valid on a base running error. In this instance, the B/R did not commit any infraction, he just did not get there "in time." No appeal, therefore no advantageous fourth out.

One more: 2 out, R3 and R2 break with pitch, batter hits a slow roller to F6. R3 scores, F6 charges, fires home and R2 is tagged out. B/R is that big slow kid (you know the one I am talking about). If the catcher then fired to first to nip him, you would not allow that "out" to nullify R3's run.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

No error? He didn't go to first! Sounds like an error to me.

 

You have two recent Pro school grads agreeing with "score R3" from the OP .....

 

They don't know nothing!

 

EXACTLY

[JaxRolo]

It a stunning moment of clarity it clicked. An appeal is only valid on a base running error. In this instance, the B/R did not commit any infraction, he just did not get there "in time." No appeal, therefore no advantageous fourth out.

One more: 2 out, R3 and R2 break with pitch, batter hits a slow roller to F6. R3 scores, F6 charges, fires home and R2 is tagged out. B/R is that big slow kid (you know the one I am talking about). If the catcher then fired to first to nip him, you would not allow that "out" to nullify R3's run.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

No error? He didn't go to first! Sounds like an error to me.

You have two recent Pro school grads agreeing with "score R3" from the OP .....

They don't know nothing!

EXACTLY

Nice you caught on to my double negative!

[Texas Manny]

Rule 4.09(B) discusses how a team scores. In it, the rule states that if a runner refuses to advance that the umpire can disallow a run, and call an offending player out. I bring this up, because it shows, in context, that the batter, once he legally puts the ball in play, or an act is done against him by the defense, that would award him 1st base, he is REQUIRED to advance to first. If in a dead ball situaiton, he is injured, a substitute player is allowed to be submitted, to complete his advance to the base or bases to which he was awarded. The rule says that the responsibility to advance and touch the bases in order, is NOT relieved, unless fans prevent such player from advancing, and the umpires can award the base(s) 4.09.

 

The throw to home plate for the 3rd out, as in the OP's scenario, is a seperate action from the batter. The batter is obligated by rule, that once he hit the ball, to advance, and touch in order, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and home, as he legally, possibly can. Just because he fell injured, that doesn't relieve him of his responsibility to advance to and touch 1st base, as required by rule. He didn't do that. It is a violation of the rule. An appeal under Rule 2.00 defines an APPEAL as a violation of the rules. 7.10B deals with this exact issue because it covers advancing to a base, which he is obligated to do.

 

So how do you negate the batter's responsibility to advance and touch the bases in order, by rule, when he didn't do that?

 

How can you say on one hand, that had the defense not attempted for the play at the plate, but tagged the batter for the 3rd out, no runs would score under 4.09 because the batter didn't complete his obligation to advance to and safely reach first base, to which when the 3rd out is made by the BR before reaching 1st, no run shall score, then, on the other hand, say the batter didn't cause a rule violation because the defense made the play at home for the third out, yet saw the batter's violation, then subsequently appealed correctly under 7.10(B) citing the batter didn't legally advance to and reach 1st safely, thus creating the advantagous "fourth" out, which the defense is allowed to do by rule 7.10? No rule negates the responsibility of running the bases in order, under normal circumstances.

 

Can't have your cake and eat it too. Or can you? LOL.