Missed Base Appeals

[rampro]

In reading J/R a missed base appeal of 1st (rounded), second or third can only occur if action is relaxed and the missed base is tagged or the runner is tagged on another base. If a runner is tagged out off the base, it is a play, but NOT an appeal.  There is then a case play where a runner misses second base and f4 receives a throw, steps on second and appeals a step before  the runner scrambles back to the bag.  According to J/R because the action is unrelaxed, therefore the runner is safe unless tagged off the bag.  

However, according to Wendelstadt, except for home plate, a runner immediately attempting to return to correct a violation may be called out on appeal if he or the base is tagged.  There is then a reference play in which a runner misses third, falls down and scrambles to get back.  A throw is made to third and the bag is tagged as the runner attempts to return.  According to Wendelstatdt, the runner is out.  Am I missing something or are these two interpretations in conflict?

[maven]

You're correct: the two interpretations conflict. Wendelstedt is the governing interpretation for pro ball, and most umpires (including most here, as far as I can tell) believe that J/R has been superseded on this point: a missed base can be appealed even when the offending runner is near the base and attempting to return.

I do like the distinction between "relaxed" and "unrelaxed" action, which is useful in other contexts.

[Cav]

NFHS...

8.2.2 SITUATION C:

The runner from first base misses second base on his way to third. He is: (a) standing on third base; or (b) halfway between second and third base when the throw from the outfield sails into the bleachers.

RULING: In (a), all the defense needs to do is verbally state that the runner missed second base. He would be ruled out. He cannot legally attempt to return to touch second, since he was on a subsequent base when the ball became dead. In (b), the runner may attempt to return and touch second base since he has not yet gained third base. The defense cannot appeal the missed base if the runner has initiated an attempt to return to the base or until all playing action is over.

 

8.2.2 SITUATION E:

The runner misses second base and, with the ball still in play, attempts to return and touch second base. The defense simply announces that he missed the base.

RULING: Since the runner has initiated action to return, the defense must tag him unless it is a force play, in which case all they would need to do is touch the base with the ball.

[grayhawk]

Check out this Fed Interp from 2000:

SITUATION 19: With a runner on first base, the batter doubles to left center. As the runner from first advances, he misses second base. With the ball still live, the third baseman tags the runner standing on third base, not knowing the runner missed second base. RULING: Since the missed base was a forced base for the runner, the runner will be declared out on a force play even though the defense did not knowingly appeal the missed base. (2-24-1, 2-29-3, 8-2-7)

[maven]

44 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

Check out this Fed Interp from 2000:

SITUATION 19: With a runner on first base, the batter doubles to left center. As the runner from first advances, he misses second base. With the ball still live, the third baseman tags the runner standing on third base, not knowing the runner missed second base. RULING: Since the missed base was a forced base for the runner, the runner will be declared out on a force play even though the defense did not knowingly appeal the missed base. (2-24-1, 2-29-3, 8-2-7)

What's next: digging up some "automatic appeals" plays from the 90's?

We need to be careful about posting these, as someone will think they're still in effect.

[Rich Ives]

You can certainly just tag the base on a left early appeal when the runner is returning, so why would anyone think you cab't just touch the base on a missed base appeal?  By rule the returning runner tag requirement says it applies at home plate. If it was intended to apply across the board it wouldn't be limited it to home plate.

[lawump]

On ‎2‎/‎26‎/‎2016 at 6:30 PM, maven said:

Wendelstedt is the governing interpretation for pro ball,

I have to object to this statement, Maven.  Neither Wendlestedt nor J/R are the governing interpretations for pro ball.  The MiLBUD Manual (formerly PBUC Manual) and MLBUM are the governing interpretations for pro ball.