Force Play

[Guest Kyle Rondeau]

In MLB, how can there possibly be a “call stands” ruling on a force play unless there is a clear obstruction of the camera angle?  The rule, contrary to what most—if not all—umpires will say, gives benefit to the runner in case of a tie...  “...The defense can retire the runner by tagging the next base before he arrives...”  As such if it is not absolutely clear that the defense beat the batter-runner to the base, (considering the availability of stop motion or freeze-frame instant replay) then the batter-runner must be declared safe.  Yes, Tie goes to the runner.  The rulebook says so in that if there is an instance of a tie, then the defense cannot be ruled to have tagged the base before the runner arrived.  One “pop” is a tie.  Runner is safe.

[Richvee]

There are no ties

[Aging_Arbiter]

 

I see 4 ties.

[beerguy55]

1 hour ago, Guest Kyle Rondeau said:

In MLB, how can there possibly be a “call stands” ruling on a force play unless there is a clear obstruction of the camera angle?  The rule, contrary to what most—if not all—umpires will say, gives benefit to the runner in case of a tie...  “...The defense can retire the runner by tagging the next base before he arrives...”  As such if it is not absolutely clear that the defense beat the batter-runner to the base, (considering the availability of stop motion or freeze-frame instant replay) then the batter-runner must be declared safe.  Yes, Tie goes to the runner.  The rulebook says so in that if there is an instance of a tie, then the defense cannot be ruled to have tagged the base before the runner arrived.  One “pop” is a tie.  Runner is safe.

Very easy.  Unless there is incontrovertible evidence that the call on the field was wrong (overturned), OR there is incontrovertible evidence that the call on the field was right (confirmed), the call stands.

This has nothing to do with whether there are ties, and what an umpire should or should not do in case of one.

Video replay is about whether or not the call on the field was wrong.   If video replay was done at a bar, rather than an officiating head office -  If in a room of 50 unbiased people all 50 can look at the video and say the call is wrong, then then it's overturned.  If all 50 can say it was right, it is confirmed.  If there's a mix, or doubt, or hesitation, or debate, or fence sitting, it stands.

28 minutes ago, Richvee said:

There are no ties

Well, sure, at the molecular level to an infinite number of decimal places, that is correct.  But at the same time, at a molecular/atomic level no two objects ever come in contact with each other - so no runner ever touches a base, no fielder ever tags a base, no fielder ever catches a ball, no glove/ball ever tags a runner, and no ball ever hits a bat.   Nobody can ever get out, nor score a run.

[Rich Ives]

1 hour ago, Richvee said:

There are no ties

Rationalization.

 

[Richvee]

9 minutes ago, Rich Ives said:

Rationalization.

 

In the case of MLB instant replay, there are no ties. The call was safe or out. If the replay judges it's so close as to say it's a virtual "tie", the call on the field will stand. Therefore, it's not a tie.

[Rich Ives]

13 minutes ago, Richvee said:

In the case of MLB instant replay, there are no ties. The call was safe or out. If the replay judges it's so close as to say it's a virtual "tie", the call on the field will stand. Therefore, it's not a tie.

If there was a tie then the call would be safe.  By rule. 

[Richvee]

4 minutes ago, Rich Ives said:

If there was a tie then the call would be safe.  By rule. 

But NY wouldn't overturn an out call of they judged the play to be so close it was a tie. That wouldn't be clear and concise evidence....or whatever term they use.

[Guest Kyle Rondeau]

by rulebook definition if it is judged to be close it was a tie then the defense failed to accomplish the requirement to retire the runner, therefore it is absured to allow an “out” call to stand.  They have the technology to view multiple angles simultaneously.  “There are no ties” is a ridiculous statement that umpires use to justify (sometimes poor) judgement decisions. But I am not here to argue that. If a team of umpires cannot determine either occurring first on freeze frame, then the defense did not meet the requirement to retire the runner.  plain and simple.  rulebook definition.

[JSam21]

50 minutes ago, Guest Kyle Rondeau said:

by rulebook definition if it is judged to be close it was a tie then the defense failed to accomplish the requirement to retire the runner, therefore it is absured to allow an “out” call to stand.  They have the technology to view multiple angles simultaneously.  “There are no ties” is a ridiculous statement that umpires use to justify (sometimes poor) judgement decisions. But I am not here to argue that. If a team of umpires cannot determine either occurring first on freeze frame, then the defense did not meet the requirement to retire the runner.  plain and simple.  rulebook definition.

Let’s try this slower so maybe you will get it. You can’t overturn something that is so close that it is a virtual tie... either way...

[ricka56]

1 hour ago, Guest Kyle Rondeau said:

“There are no ties” is a ridiculous statement that umpires use to justify (sometimes poor) judgement decisions. 

My electrical engineering job sometimes had me measuring events in nanoseconds/picoseconds. That's 0.00000000001 seconds. The naked eye can only distinguish events 0.01 seconds part (if one's really good). Though an umpire may not be able to distinguish the timing of a REAL REAL banger like an oscilloscope can, the chances of a play at 1B being a tie (in picoseconds) is VERY small. When you're got a true  baseball banger, it may look like a tie, but it ain't. Either the umpire (or replay official) nailed the call )by 3 picoseconds ), or they didn't. But it was highly unlikely a tie. 

Pitchers miss their spots, batters swing and miss, fielders boot grounders or throw the balls away, and umpires (replay officials) miss calls...get over it, buttercup. 

[ricka56]

Oh, and before instant replay (which can't distinguish events like an oscilloscope can), real bangers were decided by who screwed up the least. If the infielders made a sparkling play, the runner was out. If the infielder bobbled the ball, the runner was safe. It was an aspect of the game that contributed to baseball's charm. And it is a shame that we had to go to an imperfect replay system that CAN'T REALLY distinguish which event occurred first, to ruin a good thing. 

And now we have whiny piss-ants that want to invoke the letter of the rule, "tie goes to the runner" ... FAQ them, refer to my signature quote below.   

nostalgic techno-nerd  

[stkjock]

@ricka56 guess we need replay cameras at 60,000 fps to get down to those picoseconds

(this is a joke and not intended as a dig - sometimes things on the net don't translate well)

I also wonder if our guest can cite the rule in the book where "tie goes to the runner:  

 

 

 

[LMSANS]

By Rulebook definition there are no ties...they are either safe or out. There is no third option.

[Larry in TN]

28 minutes ago, LMSANS said:

By Rulebook definition there are no ties...they are either safe or out. There is no third option.

What in the rulebook says that there are no ties?

The rulebook says that a tag must occur 'before', or a touch must be made 'before', but 'before' does not preclude a tie.  In a tie, no action happened 'before' so any criteria that had to happen 'before' is simply not met.  i.e. A BR would not be out at 1B if his touch, and the fielders tag, were a tie because the tag did not occur 'before' his touch.

What am I missing?

[noumpere]

38 minutes ago, Larry in TN said:

What in the rulebook says that there are no ties?

The rulebook says that a tag must occur 'before', or a touch must be made 'before', but 'before' does not preclude a tie.  In a tie, no action happened 'before' so any criteria that had to happen 'before' is simply not met.  i.e. A BR would not be out at 1B if his touch, and the fielders tag, were a tie because the tag did not occur 'before' his touch.

What am I missing?

You aren't missing anything -stjock and lsmans are.

The rules used to be inconsistent between a forced runner and BR at first.  One had the runner "safe if he reached the bag before a tag;" the other had the runner "pout if the bag was tagged before the runner reached it."  It's why one of the rules was changed so they are now consistent -- and, by a literal reading of them, the ties *does* go to the runner.

[stkjock]

41 minutes ago, noumpere said:

You aren't missing anything -stjock and lsmans are.

The rules used to be inconsistent between a forced runner and BR at first.  One had the runner "safe if he reached the bag before a tag;" the other had the runner "pout if the bag was tagged before the runner reached it."  It's why one of the rules was changed so they are now consistent -- and, by a literal reading of them, the ties *does* go to the runner.

ok, however, the book doesn't actually have "tie goes to the runner" printed in it...........  which is why I put the " " around it...  

[Jimurray]

58 minutes ago, noumpere said:

You aren't missing anything -stjock and lsmans are.

The rules used to be inconsistent between a forced runner and BR at first.  One had the runner "safe if he reached the bag before a tag;" the other had the runner "pout if the bag was tagged before the runner reached it."  It's why one of the rules was changed so they are now consistent -- and, by a literal reading of them, the ties *does* go to the runner.

FED and NCAA still have some inconsistency.

[beerguy55]

7 hours ago, LMSANS said:

By Rulebook definition there are no ties...they are either safe or out. There is no third option.

In some rule book language, past and present, softball and baseball, the runner is out if tagged "while not in contact with the base."  Meaning they are safe when in contact with the base.  If there is indeed a tie, to however many decimal places you want to accept, the runner is safe, because he is in contact with the base at the same time he was tagged.  That has always been the true spirit of the game.  If you're touching the base, you're safe.  If you're not, you're not.

17 hours ago, ricka56 said:

My electrical engineering job sometimes had me measuring events in nanoseconds/picoseconds. That's 0.00000000001 seconds. The naked eye can only distinguish events 0.01 seconds part (if one's really good). Though an umpire may not be able to distinguish the timing of a REAL REAL banger like an oscilloscope can, the chances of a play at 1B being a tie (in picoseconds) is VERY small. When you're got a true  baseball banger, it may look like a tie, but it ain't. 

True, but at some point we need to be practical.  The Olympics, depending on the event, have ties to two or three decimal places - we know if we go to enough decimal places someone really did win gold alone (or worse, to the 15th decimal place we determined that Fred didn't tie for bronze...he came in fourth - too bad for him).  But we don't.  At some point we say "good enough".  Even horse and auto racing have the same standards.   Why baseball should be so special to not accept ties to an limited number of decimals places is a bit puzzling.  (at some point in the future replay review will be as good as that oscilloscope)

For all intents and purposes, there are ties in baseball.  If the naked eye of an experienced of qualified umpire sees a "tie" - it probably is.  Call the runner safe.  We want offense anyway (though I know at the amateur level we'd rather outs...finishes games faster)

 

 

 

[LMSANS]

12 hours ago, Larry in TN said:

What in the rulebook says that there are no ties?

The rulebook says that a tag must occur 'before', or a touch must be made 'before', but 'before' does not preclude a tie.  In a tie, no action happened 'before' so any criteria that had to happen 'before' is simply not met.  i.e. A BR would not be out at 1B if his touch, and the fielders tag, were a tie because the tag did not occur 'before' his touch.

What am I missing?

I’m trying to find the “tie” in the rule book. It’s not there! A runner is either safe or out. 

If there were ties, then the call would be “yer tied, do it over”. 

[Jimurray]

26 minutes ago, LMSANS said:

I’m trying to find the “tie” in the rule book. It’s not there! A runner is either safe or out. 

If there were ties, then the call would be “yer tied, do it over”. 

The guestion is, in OBR, what did you see? Did the ball beat the runner or not. In FED and NCAA it depends on which base and what was tagged or touched. 

[noumpere]

9 hours ago, LMSANS said:

I’m trying to find the “tie” in the rule book. It’s not there! A runner is either safe or out. 

If there were ties, then the call would be “yer tied, do it over”. 

While you can't find the word, the logic is there.  And, just because there are only two results (safe or out), doesn't mean there can't be three cases (runner first, ball first, tie) -- the first and last in that list have the same result.

[beerguy55]

9 hours ago, LMSANS said:

I’m trying to find the “tie” in the rule book. It’s not there! A runner is either safe or out. 

If there were ties, then the call would be “yer tied, do it over”. 

The fact that a runner is either safe or out does not preclude the possibility of a tie.  The only question is whether or not a tie results in a safe or an out.  As stated above, there are many inconsistencies on that point, not only between the rule sets, but even within the rule sets.

Personally, I think following a simple principle solves the problem - the runner is out if he or the base (when applicable) is tagged while he is not in contact with the base - and very similar language to this does appear in FED, and most softball, rules.   And, really, hasn't that always been one of the most basic tenets of the game...one of the first things you learn on the school yard - if you're touching the base you're safe.

After that the only question is whether you accept that a tag and a touch can happen at the same time, whether you choose to view that literally, practically or philosophically.

 

[Larry in TN]

10 hours ago, LMSANS said:

I’m trying to find the “tie” in the rule book. It’s not there! A runner is either safe or out. 

And the rules, as written, provide the answer (safe or out) in situations where the tag and touch occurs simultaneously--all without using the word "tie".

 

[ricka56]

When the DHC comes out, and you say that you safed BR because tie goes to the runner, you (and your partner) are in trouble. It should be either:

skip, I had the runner beating the throw, or
skip, I had the throw beating the runner.

Saying that it was a tie dooms the crew to abuse/ejections. 

[beerguy55]

17 minutes ago, ricka56 said:

When the DHC comes out, and you say that you safed BR because tie goes to the runner, you (and your partner) are in trouble. It should be either:

skip, I had the runner beating the throw, or
skip, I had the throw beating the runner.

Saying that it was a tie dooms the crew to abuse/ejections. 

I have no problem with that.   Nor do I have a problem with "the runner was touching the base when the ball arrived"...yours is more concise.

Frankly, if a DHC is arguing on ANY bang-bang play - I don't care who beat what, or if there was a true tie to 750 decimal places, the DHC should be squashed.   Anything less than half a step either way the only argument should be whether or not someone was actually touching the base or had the ball...not who beat what.