Jump to content
alex7

R misses home, tries to self-correct, 3rd out happens before correction

Recommended Posts

Would love some feedback on this situation I had yesterday:

R2, R3, 2 outs. BR gets a basehit, R3 scores but I see him miss the plate. R2 rounds 3rd, the 1b takes the relay throw and guns it to the 3b. 

Base umpires calls R2 safe at third. Now I see R3, who knew he missed home, come back and touch it.

My question: Had my base umpire called R2 out for out #3, would I still score the run because of the general rule that a base is obtained by a R passing it (if missed), or would R2's obvious attempt at fixing his mistake be treated like an appeal and a timing play, meaning the run would not score because the third out was made prior to his touching home plate?

ncaa game, if that matters for rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what NCAA wants here. IIRC, Wendelstedt has ruled that, when R3 returns to the plate to touch it, his touch supersedes his earlier acquiring of the base. As it occurs after the third out, no run. Had R3 simply gone to the dugout, the run would have counted, pending appeal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, maven said:

I don't know what NCAA wants here. IIRC, Wendelstedt has ruled that, when R3 returns to the plate to touch it, his touch supersedes his earlier acquiring of the base. As it occurs after the third out, no run. Had R3 simply gone to the dugout, the run would have counted, pending appeal.

Quick question on this...let's say you judged the runner had touched the plate, but he comes back after the 3rd out and touches again, thinking he may have missed it 1st time by..We would score that run, I'd assume? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Richvee said:

Quick question on this...let's say you judged the runner had touched the plate, but he comes back after the 3rd out and touches again, thinking he may have missed it 1st time by..We would score that run, I'd assume? 

Sure, why not? He scored before the third out, garden variety time play.

The requirement is touching the plate, not touching the plate and being sure that one touched the plate. ;)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For OBR, 2013 PBUC says:

If home plate is missed during a time play, the umpire should immediately rule on the time play even if the runner misses the plate.  The defense is required to recognize that the plate has been missed. If the defense properly appeals, the umpire then should then reverse his prior decision and cancel the run.  Even if the runner has returned to touch the plate prior to the appeal, the defense's appeal is sustained because no run may score after the third is made.  (See OBR 4.09(a) )

 

So if the defense notices the miss, they get to cancel the run without exactly getting a 4th out.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Richvee said:

Quick question on this...let's say you judged the runner had touched the plate, but he comes back after the 3rd out and touches again, thinking he may have missed it 1st time by..We would score that run, I'd assume? 

I agree; score the run.

Rule 5.08(a) Comment (Rule 5.06 Comment): A run legally
scored cannot be nullified by subsequent action of the runner,
such as but not limited to an effort to return to third base in the
belief that he had left the base before a caught fly ball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, basejester said:

For OBR, 2013 PBUC says:

If home plate is missed during a time play, the umpire should immediately rule on the time play even if the runner misses the plate.  The defense is required to recognize that the plate has been missed. If the defense properly appeals, the umpire then should then reverse his prior decision and cancel the run.  Even if the runner has returned to touch the plate prior to the appeal, the defense's appeal is sustained because no run may score after the third is made.  (See OBR 4.09(a) )

 

So if the defense notices the miss, they get to cancel the run without exactly getting a 4th out.

 

 

 

 

It would still be a fourth out. The runner that "scored" becomes the last out upon proper appeal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Matt said:

It would still be a fourth out. The runner that "scored" becomes the last out upon proper appeal.

I argue the runner can't be out because he did touch home.  All we're doing is establishing the order of events.  But whatever, the run doesn't score.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, basejester said:

I argue the runner can't be out because he did touch home.  All we're doing is establishing the order of events.  But whatever, the run doesn't score.

He missed HP, then the third out was made. The passage you quoted from PBUC states that, even if the runner subsequently corrects his error, a proper appeal will be sustained, which entails that the runner will be called out. That would be an advantageous 4th out.

So the runner's touch of HP doesn't count for anything: it doesn't score the run, and it doesn't remove the liability to appeal. Since he can be successfully appealed, he can be out.

OTOH, if you claim he can't be put out, then his run should score: a runner who legally touches HP by rule scores a run. So your statements above entail a contradiction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, maven said:

He missed HP, then the third out was made. The passage you quoted from PBUC states that, even if the runner subsequently corrects his error, a proper appeal will be sustained, which entails that the runner will be called out. That would be an advantageous 4th out.

So the runner's touch of HP doesn't count for anything: it doesn't score the run, and it doesn't remove the liability to appeal. Since he can be successfully appealed, he can be out.

OTOH, if you claim he can't be put out, then his run should score: a runner who legally touches HP by rule scores a run. So your statements above entail a contradiction.

There's some inherent goofiness in the 4th out appeal.

I think the rationale for not recognizing the runner going back and touching home (correct his error) is that the inning is over when the other runner is put out for the 3rd out.  Agreed?

But if the defense appeals the runner at home, then we rewind and treat the appeal at home as happening first.  The defense picks their favorite out.  But the out at home depends on picking the third out not at home to make the runner fixing his error invalid.  The defense has to pick BOTH outs to make this work, which makes this case unusual.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, basejester said:

There's some inherent goofiness in the 4th out appeal.

I think the rationale for not recognizing the runner going back and touching home (correct his error) is that the inning is over when the other runner is put out for the 3rd out.  Agreed?

But if the defense appeals the runner at home, then we rewind and treat the appeal at home as happening first.  The defense picks their favorite out.  But the out at home depends on picking the third out not at home to make the runner fixing his error invalid.  The defense has to pick BOTH outs to make this work, which makes this case unusual.

I don't agree that "the inning is over when the other runner is put out for the 3rd out." If that were the case, then no 4th out appeal would ever be valid. By rule, after the 3rd out the defense has the opportunity to appeal a runner's infraction in order to nullify a run. That action occurs during the half inning in which the infraction occurred. So, no, where a 4th out appeal is possible, the inning is not over when the 3rd out is made.

I do see what you're saying about the defense getting the benefit of the timing here. But hey, if the offense does not want to afford the defense the benefit of such an opportunity, they have a perfectly satisfactory way to prevent that (namely, don't miss the frigging base).

As for "inherent goofiness" of the 4th out appeal: I would agree, but extend the goofiness to all appeals. In other sports, when a team commits a foul or infraction, the officials signal it and penalize it: no action of the opponent is generally required in order to invoke a penalty (and this reflection on penalties in other sports is what motivated FED's move years ago to have "automatic appeals" enforced by the umpires). Baseball is highly unusual in this regard — one might say, "goofy."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, maven said:

Baseball is highly unusual in this regard — one might say, "goofy."

Baseball was here before basketball (Naismith 1891)  and American football (Camp rules 1880) so it's the others that are goofy. :)

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think in fairness, since the defense is allowed the advantage of the 4th out, the offense should be allowed to correct their mistake. 

My caveat would be that if the runner had left the field, he couldn't come back on to fix his mistake. Similar to the defense not being allowed back on the field. 

But I don't make the rules. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rich Ives said:

Baseball was here before basketball (Naismith 1891)  and American football (Camp rules 1880) so it's the others that are goofy. :)

True: but how old is the appeal rule? That's the relevant provision. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, maven said:

True: but how old is the appeal rule? That's the relevant provision. ;)

It's an original

Per the JEA

Historical Notes: This basic principle appeared in Cartwright's Knickerbocker Rules in 1857. Section 18 of those rules stated, in part, that after a fly ball was caught, "players running bases shall return to them, and may be put out in so returning in the same manner as the striker when returning to first base." (This meant tagging either the base or runner before he safely returned.)

 

Historical Notes: Ever since the Original Knickerbocker Rules, runners were legally required to touch the bases as they advanced around the infield. The first Major League Code of 1876 stated that "Any base-runner failing to touch the base he runs for, shall be declared out if the ball be held by a fielder, while touching said base, before the base-runner returns and touches it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, maven said:

I don't agree that "the inning is over when the other runner is put out for the 3rd out." If that were the case, then no 4th out appeal would ever be valid. By rule, after the 3rd out the defense has the opportunity to appeal a runner's infraction in order to nullify a run. That action occurs during the half inning in which the infraction occurred. So, no, where a 4th out appeal is possible, the inning is not over when the 3rd out is made.

I do see what you're saying about the defense getting the benefit of the timing here. But hey, if the offense does not want to afford the defense the benefit of such an opportunity, they have a perfectly satisfactory way to prevent that (namely, don't miss the frigging base).

As for "inherent goofiness" of the 4th out appeal: I would agree, but extend the goofiness to all appeals. In other sports, when a team commits a foul or infraction, the officials signal it and penalize it: no action of the opponent is generally required in order to invoke a penalty (and this reflection on penalties in other sports is what motivated FED's move years ago to have "automatic appeals" enforced by the umpires). Baseball is highly unusual in this regard — one might say, "goofy."

At least baseball players don't have to keep their own score, and are expected to enforce their own penalties under their own honor, with the possibility that any infraction could be randomly captured later by viewers phoning in to report them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...