Tagging up on a Bobble

[The Winning Run]

I have had this situation come up twice this year and wanted to make sure I was making the proper calls. In both situations the games were blow outs so my calls did not alter the outcome of the game. Runner(s) on (which base does not matter), less than 2 outs. Ball is hit in the air well into the outfield (no way it could ever be infield fly if that situation existed). Runners hold until they believe the ball shold be caught and take off for the next base. The outfielder does not immediately catch the ball, but bobbles it a few times before securing the catch. The bobbling of the ball is not done to deceive the runners, but due to outfielders lack of concentration or skill; some of the bobbles could be on a highlight or blooper tape. The runner(s) are clearly on their base when contact between the outfielder and ball is first made but not when the ball is secured, again think blooper reel slow motion bobbles so there is time for the runners to begin moving. The batter is out. I have ruled that the runners had to hold/ tag up once the ball is secured/ the catch is made, thus the runners can be called out for not tagging up. Does the runner(s) have to wait for the ball to be secured to properly attempt an advance? No one has questioned my calls, but I wanted to make sure I was getting the call right. 

[maven]

15 minutes ago, The Winning Run said:

Does the runner(s) have to wait for the ball to be secured to properly attempt an advance?

No. They may run when the ball is touched. Same ruling in all codes.

Long ago the rule was as you thought, and fielders would deliberately bobble the ball as they ran it in, thus preventing runners from advancing. So the rule was changed to allow the runners to go once the fly ball is touched.

[stkjock]

/\ Maven treed me and as usual nails the answer. 

[umpstu]

What stkjock says.  I had to explain this exact same thing to a college coach this season and he was still convinced I was wrong.

[Jimurray]

1 hour ago, The Winning Run said:

I have had this situation come up twice this year and wanted to make sure I was making the proper calls. In both situations the games were blow outs so my calls did not alter the outcome of the game. Runner(s) on (which base does not matter), less than 2 outs. Ball is hit in the air well into the outfield (no way it could ever be infield fly if that situation existed). Runners hold until they believe the ball shold be caught and take off for the next base. The outfielder does not immediately catch the ball, but bobbles it a few times before securing the catch. The bobbling of the ball is not done to deceive the runners, but due to outfielders lack of concentration or skill; some of the bobbles could be on a highlight or blooper tape. The runner(s) are clearly on their base when contact between the outfielder and ball is first made but not when the ball is secured, again think blooper reel slow motion bobbles so there is time for the runners to begin moving. The batter is out. I have ruled that the runners had to hold/ tag up once the ball is secured/ the catch is made, thus the runners can be called out for not tagging up. Does the runner(s) have to wait for the ball to be secured to properly attempt an advance? No one has questioned my calls, but I wanted to make sure I was getting the call right. 

What part of the world are you umpiring? Because I can't believe no one has questioned your calls in the Americas. What calls they were I'm not sure, out on appeal, when I can't picture an appeal being made in the OP. Or, out without an appeal?

[The Winning Run]

I am in Ohio. I was shocked in both cases that I was not at least questioned about it, but I think the teams were wanting to wrap up the blows out quickly. In both cases after the outfielder finally caught the ball he threw the ball back into the infield. As least one runner advanced (2nd to 3rd in situation #1 and 3rd to home in situation #2). I was asked in situation #2 by the manager before another pitch was thrown if the batter was out (not arguing but a clarification question). I confirmed the out, but did not say anything about the defense having or not having the ability to double off a runner, which I obviously now know was wrong. The ball was tossed back to the pitcher and the game carried on. There was never a verbal or physical appeal to any base the runner had started on. Nor was there any questions after the game.

[udbrky]

If there was no appeal on the tagup, how did you rule they had to wait for secure possession?

[maven]

9 hours ago, umpstu said:

What stkjock says.  I had to explain this exact same thing to a college coach this season and he was still convinced I was wrong.

That's surprising. For FED and NCAA this is black letter rule (8-4-2 and 8-6-a-1, respectively). OBR 5.09(b)(5) is interpreted the same.

[umpstu]

4 hours ago, maven said:

That's surprising. For FED and NCAA this is black letter rule (8-4-2 and 8-6-a-1, respectively). OBR 5.09(b)(5) is interpreted the same.

Yes sir.

[spiritump]

Do you ever look in the rule book????

[GoodCallBlue!]

On ‎7‎/‎19‎/‎2016 at 8:56 PM, maven said:

No. They may run when the ball is touched. Same ruling in all codes.

Long ago the rule was as you thought, and fielders would deliberately bobble the ball as they ran it in, thus preventing runners from advancing. So the rule was changed to allow the runners to go once the fly ball is touched.

is this your life maven? LOL

[kylehutson]

11 hours ago, GoodCallBlue! said:

is this your life maven? LOL

I'm quite happy that maven spends so much time here. I've learned so much from him, it's amazing. Do you just come here to ?

[johnnyg08]

Keep it civil, keep it on topic.  It's that simple.  

[VolUmp]

Many rules were created to close loopholes that players figured out 100+ years ago.

This OP is just one example.

 

1) Infield Fly Rule

2) D3K exception with runner on 1B and less than 2 outs

3) Intentionally kicking double play ball

4) Returning to base (later vicinity of the base) after a foul ball

5) Intentionally dropped infield line drive with men in force situation