Replay in MLB

[Don Summers]

In Major League Baseball. Runner on first with no one out. Shallow fly ball hit and center fielder dives for the ball and it is called a catch by the umpires. The runner returns to first and the center fielder throws the ball to second baseman standing on the base. The opposing manager challenges the catch and after review the catch call is overturned and the batter is awarded first base. Is the runner who was on first called out due to it becoming a force play after the catch is overturned? Is the play dead? Is it an umpire judgment call or are there specific rules to cover it? What’s the call and why? 

[LRZ]

Sounds like a case for OBR 8.02(c), which reads, in part:

If the umpires consult after a play and change a call that had been made, then they have the authority to take all steps that they may deem necessary, in their discretion, to eliminate the results and consequences of the earlier call that they are reversing, including placing runners where they think those runners would have been after the play, had the ultimate call been made as the initial call, disregarding interference or obstruction that may have occurred on the play; failures of runners to tag up based upon the initial call on the field; runners passing other runners or missing bases; etc., all in the discretion of the umpires.

If ultimately ruled a catch, I'd have an out on the batter and R1 remaining at first.

There may be specific challenge/review protocols, of which I am unaware.

[Rich Ives]

33 minutes ago, LRZ said:

 

If ultimately ruled a catch, I'd have an out on the batter and R1 remaining at first.

 

But was ruled NOT a catch so place R1 on 2B

[Don Summers]

I’m not sure I’m following. If the play had been ruled a catch, obviously the batter would be out and the runner would remain on first. That’s what was initially ruled but then overruled after replay. When the play was ruled a catch the runner from first naturally returned to first and play stopped while the throw came in toward second.
 

After the opposing manager challenged and the call was changed from a catch to a trap, are you saying the runners would be placed on first and second regardless or would it be up to the umpires to decide what would have happened if the play would have been initially called a trap? If that were the case the center fielder could have fairly easily gotten to his feet and thrown to second for the force but did not because play stopped after a catch was ruled. Could the umpires have determined that the runner would have been out at second and decided to rule so if they thought that’s what would have happened if it had been initially ruled a trap?

[LRZ]

I got the situation backwards when I opined--my error. If ultimately ruled "no catch," the likely negation for me would be R1 out on the force at second (on the assumption that he was holding up on the play, as Don Summers noted) and the batter at first. Shallow fly to CF, with a short throw to second? 

But there is an element of HTBT--what did R1 do, where did he stop to see if the ball would be caught?--although I think the assumption of caution is most reasonable. I would not place R1 at second, although if the circumstances suggested it strongly enough, you could  [possibly, but unlikely] have R1 and R2.

[beerguy55]

13 hours ago, Don Summers said:

I’m not sure I’m following. If the play had been ruled a catch, obviously the batter would be out and the runner would remain on first. That’s what was initially ruled but then overruled after replay. When the play was ruled a catch the runner from first naturally returned to first and play stopped while the throw came in toward second.
 

After the opposing manager challenged and the call was changed from a catch to a trap, are you saying the runners would be placed on first and second regardless or would it be up to the umpires to decide what would have happened if the play would have been initially called a trap? If that were the case the center fielder could have fairly easily gotten to his feet and thrown to second for the force but did not because play stopped after a catch was ruled. Could the umpires have determined that the runner would have been out at second and decided to rule so if they thought that’s what would have happened if it had been initially ruled a trap?

To be clear...play didn't stop after everyone thought it was a catch.  The play is still live.  That's why R1 opted to return to first...he thought it was a catch and didn't want to be out on appeal for leaving early.

HTBT but the likelihood is the runner himself thought it was caught and made the decision to return to first before any umpire ruled it a catch.   An umpire incorrectly calling it an out would probably be inconsequential to the play.     The players need to know the call as soon as possible to know what to do, but in reality they need to make that decision before they know the ump's judgment...and it's a coin flip.

There might even be a reason F8 threw the ball to second base and not first base...that is, he KNEW he didn't catch it.

It's a judgment call for the umpires to what would have happened...but, in reality, the play probably happened exactly the way it would have happened.

[noumpere]

Here's the NCAA rule (yes, I know the OP asked about OBR).  You can argue that sometimes an "out" would have been the result, and sometimes R1 would have advanced to third or home, but the rule takes the judgment and the resulting arguments out of it.