hypothetical: runner skips 3B by a lot

[ErichKeane]

So I saw a video on Facebook of something that is apparently becoming more common against 1 and 2 man crews (and apparently comes from softball?).

R2/R1 sees the umpire/s are watching the right side of the field, so "shortcuts" 3B by quite a bit to get to the plate sooner, and with the hope/intent that they would get away with it, since the umpire is distracted watching the ball and won't see it for appeal.

I know in a perfect world we would see all touches, but we obviously cannot see every one.

 

If you were to actually have caught this on the field, how would you rule/react? Obviously it isn't a problem in OBR so I don't expect any pro case plays, and I don't see any NFHS ones.

Part of me wants to come down hard on the offending team, but I fear I'm limited to just getting the "out" on appeal.

[ErichKeane]

NOT sure I could justify 'abandonment' for skipping by that much, but perhaps a sportsmanship violation?  FED 3-3-1(f) 4:

3-3-1: A coach, player, substitute, attendant or other bench personnel shall not:

(f): commit any unsportsmanlike act to include, but not limited to,

(4): behavior in any manner not in accordance with the spirit of fair play

PENALTY: The umpire shall warn the offender unless the offense is judged to be major, in which case an ejection shall occur. A warning may be verbal or written. If written, the offender shall be restricted to the bench/dugout for the remainder of the game. If a coach has previously received a verbal warning, he shall receive a written warning (10-2-3j) and be restricted to the bench/dugout for the remainder of the game. If a coach has previously received a written warning, he shall be ejected for any subsequent offense. Any offense judged to be major in nature shall result in an immediate ejection.

[umpstu]

30 minutes ago, ErichKeane said:

So I saw a video on Facebook of something that is apparently becoming more common against 1 and 2 man crews (and apparently comes from softball?).

R2/R1 sees the umpire/s are watching the right side of the field, so "shortcuts" 3B by quite a bit to get to the plate sooner, and with the hope/intent that they would get away with it, since the umpire is distracted watching the ball and won't see it for appeal.

I know in a perfect world we would see all touches, but we obviously cannot see every one.

 

If you were to actually have caught this on the field, how would you rule/react? Obviously it isn't a problem in OBR so I don't expect any pro case plays, and I don't see any NFHS ones.

Part of me wants to come down hard on the offending team, but I fear I'm limited to just getting the "out" on appeal.

How are you going to come down hard on the offending team if you didn't see what happened.  PU had the fair foul on the bunt down first base line and possible RLI.  They bunted down the first base line on purpose.  Worked to perfection.

And it isn't new.  Had it happen to me in 1995 and about 4 years ago.  You ain't cheatin' you ain't tryin'.

 

[ErichKeane]

1 minute ago, umpstu said:

How are you going to come down hard on the offending team if you didn't see what happened.  PU had the fair foul on the bunt down first base line and possible RLI.  They bunted down the first base line on purpose.  Worked to perfection.

And it isn't new.  Had it happen to me in 1995 and about 4 years ago.  You ain't cheatin' you ain't tryin'.

 

The hypothetical is a case where I DID catch them, they intentionally try to get away with it but don't, hence the "if you were to actually have caught this on the field, how would you rule/react?".  THIS goes way beyond "don't hate the player..." to me.

[Senor Azul]

From the 2016 edition of the Baseball Rules Differences (section 5, pp. 17-19) (in addition to the online case plays below FED has a current case play in the book—8.2.6 Situation H):

Appeals:  Last Time By

FED:  If a runner, either advancing or returning, correctly touches a base that was missed the last time he passes by that base, his final touch corrects any previous baserunning infraction. (8-2-6L; 8.2.6H; Website 2011 #15)  EXCEPT:

Official Interpretation: Hopkins:  “Last time by” does not apply when a runner misses a base to gain an unfair advantage. (Website 2011 #16 and 18)

2011 NFHS Baseball Rules Interpretations

SITUATION 16: As R1 attempts to score from second base, he misses third base by cutting well inside the infield. With the fly ball being caught, Brown attempts to return, touching third as he goes back to second base. RULING: Brown will be declared out on the appeal because a runner who misses a base in a manner to gain an unfair advantage is still vulnerable to appeal. (8-2-6l)

SITUATION 18: R1 leaves first base too soon on a caught fly ball. He touches second and nears third when his coach instructs him to return. R1 does so by running directly across the diamond toward first base. The ball gets by the first baseman, and R1 retouches first and makes it safely to second base. RULING: R1 would be declared out upon proper appeal by the defense as the principle of “Last Time By” would not apply. (8-2-6l)

NCAA:  Same as FED. (2-52)

Official Interpretation:  Paronto:  Same as FED official interpretation. (10/17/13)

Play 4-5:  R1 leaves too soon on a fly ball. He touches second and advances near third when he realizes he must return and does so by running directly across the diamond toward first. The ball gets by F3; and R1 after retouching first, makes it safely to second. The defense appeals that he missed second, the base on which he now stands, during his return to first.  RULING:  In FED and NCAA, the umpire will uphold the appeal. At those levels “last time by” applies to situations where the runner could have touched the base but missed it by less than his body’s length. In OBR, the appeal is denied, and the runner is not out.

[ErichKeane]

9 minutes ago, Senor Azul said:

From the 2016 edition of the Baseball Rules Differences (section 5, pp. 17-19) (in addition to the online case plays below FED has a current case play in the book—8.2.6 Situation H):

Appeals:  Last Time By

FED:  If a runner, either advancing or returning, correctly touches a base that was missed the last time he passes by that base, his final touch corrects any previous baserunning infraction. (8-2-6L; 8.2.6H; Website 2011 #15)  EXCEPT:

Official Interpretation: Hopkins:  “Last time by” does not apply when a runner misses a base to gain an unfair advantage. (Website 2011 #16 and 18)

2011 NFHS Baseball Rules Interpretations

SITUATION 16: As R1 attempts to score from second base, he misses third base by cutting well inside the infield. With the fly ball being caught, Brown attempts to return, touching third as he goes back to second base. RULING: Brown will be declared out on the appeal because a runner who misses a base in a manner to gain an unfair advantage is still vulnerable to appeal. (8-2-6l)

SITUATION 18: R1 leaves first base too soon on a caught fly ball. He touches second and nears third when his coach instructs him to return. R1 does so by running directly across the diamond toward first base. The ball gets by the first baseman, and R1 retouches first and makes it safely to second base. RULING: R1 would be declared out upon proper appeal by the defense as the principle of “Last Time By” would not apply. (8-2-6l)

NCAA:  Same as FED. (2-52)

Official Interpretation:  Paronto:  Same as FED official interpretation. (10/17/13)

Play 4-5:  R1 leaves too soon on a fly ball. He touches second and advances near third when he realizes he must return and does so by running directly across the diamond toward first. The ball gets by F3; and R1 after retouching first, makes it safely to second. The defense appeals that he missed second, the base on which he now stands, during his return to first.  RULING:  In FED and NCAA, the umpire will uphold the appeal. At those levels “last time by” applies to situations where the runner could have touched the base but missed it by less than his body’s length. In OBR, the appeal is denied, and the runner is not out.

Sadly all of these are for a re-touch, and the 'worst' case for the offending team is so minor, it is a shame it doesn't discourage this behavior.  "Anything not sufficiently punished/discouraged, is encouraged".

[SH0102]

Erich, I know you’re newer so cut you some slack.  As an umpire, your job is to be a fair arbiter OF THE RULES.  You are to know the rules, respect the rules, and enforce the rules.  There is no room for subjecting your own opinions and penalties.

If a runner misses the base by an inch or seven feet, they are subject to being out on appeal. If they shortcut it that much, they make it a lot easier on everyone to see it.  If you’re gonna miss him missing it by seven feet you weren’t gonna see him miss by an inch.

in a solo game, you should still have good vision bc you can’t go as far, use your peripherals.  In 2 man, I’d say I get 98% of touches.  If I’m plate, and my BU in middle has to stay with fly ball, I yell “I’ve got your touch of first”.  If plate has to stay with fly down 1B line, as BU I’ll help with his touches at third (assuming 2 outs and runner is running)

With experience you have a sense of when they are getting to the bag. I’ve seen many newer umpires stare at a bag for five seconds waiting for the touch, which is why they miss other touches.  

Anyways, my main point is you should not be in search of ways to enforce penalties that are not supported by rule.  I had a hidden ball trick a summer ago that worked and offended coach came to me and said “that’s bush league” and I told him “but they didn’t violate any rules”.  If I hate the hidden ball trick, can I go in search of ways to rid the game of it?

If a player cuts it off, nail them on appeal. If defense somehow misses it, oh well, move along. Not your job to announce missed bases. And not your job to care. Independent fair arbiter, you see it, they appeal it, you call it.  You’ve done your job, and done it well

[ErichKeane]

4 minutes ago, SH0102 said:

Erich, I know you’re newer so cut you some slack.  As an umpire, your job is to be a fair arbiter OF THE RULES.  You are to know the rules, respect the rules, and enforce the rules.  There is no room for subjecting your own opinions and penalties.

If a runner misses the base by an inch or seven feet, they are subject to being out on appeal. If they shortcut it that much, they make it a lot easier on everyone to see it.  If you’re gonna miss him missing it by seven feet you weren’t gonna see him miss by an inch.

in a solo game, you should still have good vision bc you can’t go as far, use your peripherals.  In 2 man, I’d say I get 98% of touches.  If I’m plate, and my BU in middle has to stay with fly ball, I yell “I’ve got your touch of first”.  If plate has to stay with fly down 1B line, as BU I’ll help with his touches at third (assuming 2 outs and runner is running)

With experience you have a sense of when they are getting to the bag. I’ve seen many newer umpires stare at a bag for five seconds waiting for the touch, which is why they miss other touches.  

Anyways, my main point is you should not be in search of ways to enforce penalties that are not supported by rule.  I had a hidden ball trick a summer ago that worked and offended coach came to me and said “that’s bush league” and I told him “but they didn’t violate any rules”.  If I hate the hidden ball trick, can I go in search of ways to rid the game of it?

If a player cuts it off, nail them on appeal. If defense somehow misses it, oh well, move along. Not your job to announce missed bases. And not your job to care. Independent fair arbiter, you see it, they appeal it, you call it.  You’ve done your job, and done it well

Yeah, I appreciate that, thank you for this, it is a particularly helpful reflection. 

I personally was instilled with a deep respect for the game and sportsmanship, so seeing blatantly unsportsmanlike cheating like this just pangs my heart 😕  I guess I never saw the HBT as more than part of the game, and perhaps I'm being a bit "back in my day!" here, but this just feels on a different level.

Oh well, I guess I'll have to just hope that if this ever happens I catch it, and so does the other team.

[SH0102]

5 minutes ago, ErichKeane said:

Yeah, I appreciate that, thank you for this, it is a particularly helpful reflection. 

I personally was instilled with a deep respect for the game and sportsmanship, so seeing blatantly unsportsmanlike cheating like this just pangs my heart 😕  I guess I never saw the HBT as more than part of the game, and perhaps I'm being a bit "back in my day!" here, but this just feels on a different level.

Oh well, I guess I'll have to just hope that if this ever happens I catch it, and so does the other team.

I should have added, many umpires have a rule they think should be changed, or added. I didn’t mean you can’t have opinions, but on the field, you better put those opinions aside, that’s what I meant by what I said.

And I know you do a lot of solo games. In 2 man, with two experienced umpires, this would almost never be able to happen.  And in all my games I’ve ever done, never seen it, so highly doubt this is “frequent”.  

Anyways, glad you joined the brotherhood. Keep on working

[Richvee]

12 hours ago, SH0102 said:

If a player cuts it off, nail them on appeal. If defense somehow misses it, oh well, move along. Not your job to announce missed bases. And not your job to care. Independent fair arbiter, you see it, they appeal it, you call it.  You’ve done your job, and done it well

it is interesting though, that the powers that be (the rule makers) don't want us keeping the game fair if we see a huge base miss like this with the intention to gain an unfair advantage. There are plenty of examples of teams trying to gain an unfair advantage that we call right away and the opposing team does not need to see it and appeal first. 

1. illegal bats, gloves

2. coach aiding a runner

3. foreign substances

4. quick pitch/balks

I'm sure there's more. Point is, these are infractions of one team trying to gain an illegal advantage that we call without appeal. Yet cutting 7 feet off the 3B bag, if we see it, we are to stay silent unless the defense saw it and appeals. Actually a little inconsistent IMO. 

 

 

[Senor Azul]

Most of the rules have evolved over time as this one has. In fact, when the National League played its first season players pretty much had to appeal to the umpire for a decision on every play. That’s where the idea that an umpire only rules when appealed to came from. It has sort of been random since then—there is no real reason why some rules must be appealed and others ruled upon immediately.

According to the book A Game of Inches by Peter Morris, a sportswriter named Frank Young asked umpires in 1928 why these rules must be appealed and here’s what umpires replied then, “it’s up to the opposing team to ask for our ruling. We can’t be expected to play their game for them.”

1876 NL rules

RULE VII. — THE UMPIRE AND HIS DUTIES.

Appealing to the umpire.

Sec. 7. The umpire shall render no decision in the game except when appealed to by a player, unless expressly required to do so by the rules of the game, as in calling “balls,” etc.

 

Skipping ahead from that point to the 1920 rule book—

Rule 56 Section 13 notes following (the rule dealing with runners cutting bases)—

…It should be noted that the attention of the umpire must be called to the act of a runner having omitted to touch a base. The umpire is a referee; not a policeman; and questions of fact are submitted to him for decision in his judicial capacity.

I realize this in no way is as helpful as posts containing nothing but opinion but I hope someone might find it a bit interesting.

[noumpere]

3 hours ago, Richvee said:

it is interesting though, that the powers that be (the rule makers) don't want us keeping the game fair if we see a huge base miss like this with the intention to gain an unfair advantage. There are plenty of examples of teams trying to gain an unfair advantage that we call right away and the opposing team does not need to see it and appeal first. 

1. illegal bats, gloves

2. coach aiding a runner

3. foreign substances

4. quick pitch/balks

I'm sure there's more. Point is, these are infractions of one team trying to gain an illegal advantage that we call without appeal. Yet cutting 7 feet off the 3B bag, if we see it, we are to stay silent unless the defense saw it and appeals. Actually a little inconsistent IMO. 

 

 

For years, FED had the "if the umpire sees a missed base he shall declare the runner out" rule.  IT was good to change it to the current rule, imo.  It caused more problems than it solved.

[Catch18]

For years, FED had the "if the umpire sees a missed base he shall declare the runner out" rule.  IT was good to change it to the current rule, imo.  It caused more problems than it solved.

What were some problems you saw?

[Richvee]

6 hours ago, noumpere said:

For years, FED had the "if the umpire sees a missed base he shall declare the runner out" rule.  IT was good to change it to the current rule, imo.  It caused more problems than it solved.

I'm not saying we should be banging guys out for missed bases. But I'd be OK with a rule that let us call a runner out for intentionally missing a base by cutting 7 feet inside the bag. That's not a base running mistake..That's intentionally cheating.  

[ErichKeane]

2 minutes ago, Richvee said:

I'm not saying we should be banging guys out for missed bases. But I'd be OK with a rule that let us call a runner out for intentionally missing a base by cutting 7 feet inside the bag. That's not a base running mistake..That's intentionally cheating.  

My heart agrees with you there.  Feels very 'travesty/mockery of the game' to me, but @SH0102's words still ring in my head until someone of importance creates a case play out of it.

[Catch18]

I'm not saying we should be banging guys out for missed bases. But I'd be OK with a rule that let us call a runner out for intentionally missing a base by cutting 7 feet inside the bag. That's not a base running mistake..That's intentionally cheating.  

I agree. The rule & any accompanying case play(s) could be written as such.

[The Man in Blue]

On 7/3/2022 at 10:20 PM, Richvee said:

I'm not saying we should be banging guys out for missed bases. But I'd be OK with a rule that let us call a runner out for intentionally missing a base by cutting 7 feet inside the bag. That's not a base running mistake..That's intentionally cheating.  

That is where I thought the OP was going ... not in asking should we call the out for missing the base, but asking is there a penalty to be enforced for something so blatant.

Here is my thing ... If I had this happen and I saw it happen BUT the defense did not appeal, at the end of the inning I would be going over to the coach and having a talk about sportsmanship ... paired with the warning.  I'm not ringing up a runner and I'm not ejecting, but I am saying do NOT do that again.  That action is not only not sporting, but it is making a mockery of the game and, IMO, an act of intentionally trying to show up an umpire.  It is saying, "I know you can't make this call, so what are you going to do about it?"

After that, a coach who is coaching his players that way will be on a very short leash.

[maven]

On 7/3/2022 at 11:23 PM, ErichKeane said:

My heart agrees with you there.  Feels very 'travesty/mockery of the game' to me, but @SH0102's words still ring in my head until someone of importance creates a case play out of it.

First, I recommend avoiding the term 'travesty', which appears in the book in 1 specific place. It is not a generic term with wide application.

Next, FED (and it seems NCAA) distinguish between missing a base because of an error and missing it because of cheating. A runner may correct his error on the last time by. This is the garden variety missed-base play.

A cheater in these codes—a runner who intentionally cuts the corner to gain an advantage—may not correct his miss. He should be ruled out on proper appeal, with a live-ball tag of the missed base or runner or (in FED) a dead-ball verbal appeal. 

You're right that the FED case plays concern retouching bases: the cases are intended to illustrate the limits of the "last time by" principle, so they employ plays where a runner has to pass a base multiple times.

But the underlying principle is, as I've suggested, to distinguish errors from cheating and penalize them differently.

[agdz59]

Part of the different treatment could be that the cheating case is a delayed dead ball and the defense gets to choose whether they want the results of the play or the out plus all other runners at the base last acquired when the intentional miss of the base occurred.

 

[beerguy55]

17 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

That is where I thought the OP was going ... not in asking should we call the out for missing the base, but asking is there a penalty to be enforced for something so blatant.

Here is my thing ... If I had this happen and I saw it happen BUT the defense did not appeal, at the end of the inning I would be going over to the coach and having a talk about sportsmanship ... paired with the warning.  I'm not ringing up a runner and I'm not ejecting, but I am saying do NOT do that again.  That action is not only not sporting, but it is making a mockery of the game and, IMO, an act of intentionally trying to show up an umpire.  It is saying, "I know you can't make this call, so what are you going to do about it?"

After that, a coach who is coaching his players that way will be on a very short leash.

It's funny the FED rules specifically mention the batter peaking at the catcher's signs as an ejectable offense (after a warning), but not this...I guess you can fall back on "behavior in any manner not in accordance with the spirit of fair play;" - with that language in the book, eject the player...if it happens again eject the player and the coach.  (whether or not the defense successfully appeals - though your ejection might tip off the defense to appeal)

[Velho]

1 hour ago, beerguy55 said:

though your ejection might tip off the defense to appeal)

 🤣  🤣  🤣  🤣  🤣  🤣  🤣  🤣  🤣 

[Senor Azul]

Here’s what Hunter Wendelstedt had to say about a gross miss of a base when asked by Carl Childress (BRD 2016 edition, section 5, p. 18):

“First, how do you make a determination as to whether he was attempting to abide by the rules? How close does he have to be? I know that some have said a body’s length. What about the runner who slides into second and passes it? Then he gets up and tries to return to first. In doing so, he makes a wide turn toward third. Now, he’s missed it, but what if it’s a foot or two outside of his body’s length? He’s just trying to get back to first. Yes, he’s in violation, but no more of a violation than someone who just cuts across the infield. In short, a miss is a miss. The rule book says that he or the bag must be tagged before he touches it. If the ball is thrown out of play, and he touches (the base) on his way to his award, he has met the requirement.

“That leads me into my second point. Let’s say the ball isn’t thrown out of play but down the line in foul territory. That same runner crosses across the middle of the infield and misses second. When the ball gets away, he tags up from first and then advances to second. Now the defense tags him WHILE HE’S STANDING ON SECOND BASE to APPEAL HE MISSED SECOND BASE. It seems to me silly that this runner should now be called out for missing the base he’s presently standing on.”

[The Man in Blue]

11 hours ago, maven said:

First, I recommend avoiding the term 'travesty', which appears in the book in 1 specific place. It is not a generic term with wide application.

Next, FED (and it seems NCAA) distinguish between missing a base because of an error and missing it because of cheating. A runner may correct his error on the last time by. This is the garden variety missed-base play.

A cheater in these codes—a runner who intentionally cuts the corner to gain an advantage—may not correct his miss. He should be ruled out on proper appeal, with a live-ball tag of the missed base or runner or (in FED) a dead-ball verbal appeal. 

You're right that the FED case plays concern retouching bases: the cases are intended to illustrate the limits of the "last time by" principle, so they employ plays where a runner has to pass a base multiple times.

But the underlying principle is, as I've suggested, to distinguish errors from cheating and penalize them differently.

 

TMIB's Soapbox ... climb on up with me ...

DOES Fed distinguish between missing a base because of an error and missing it because of cheating?  Do they really?

There is the case play posted, but DOES the rulebook distinguish between them?  Hint: the answer starts with "n" and ends with "o, sir".  So Fed doesn't really distinguish between them by rule, but instead an interpreter has "subject[ed] [his] own opinions and penalties."  There is no rule to support this position.  Granted, I understand an interpreter is an officially recognized position, but this is the equivalent of a judge legislating from the bench.

While I agree with the interpreter that there needs to be a distinct penalty for blatant cheating, I disagree that Fed distinguishes between cheating and a mistake/sloppy play (at least in this case).

Finally ... the word "cheat" never appears in the rulebook.  While that is only one less time than "travesty", it doesn't mean cheating can't be done.  Use "travesty" liberally and as often as you can, otherwise it is a travesty of the English language not to use a word.  Don't cheat yourself out of that joy.  😉

 

[Senor Azul]

It's funny the FED rules specifically mention the batter peaking at the catcher's signs as an ejectable offense (after a warning), but not this.

Mr. beerguy55, could you provide a citation for a batter peaking (peeking or even piquing) at the catcher being an ejectable offense  please. I hate to admit it but that is totally new to me.

[beerguy55]

9 hours ago, Senor Azul said:

It's funny the FED rules specifically mention the batter peaking at the catcher's signs as an ejectable offense (after a warning), but not this.

Mr. beerguy55, could you provide a citation for a batter peaking (peeking or even piquing) at the catcher being an ejectable offense  please. I hate to admit it but that is totally new to me.

This is a brain fart on my side...I was looking through rules and that on unsporstmanlike conduct, and stumbled across a statement about this - but looking back I think I conflated the rules with perhaps someone's guidelines/opinion?

This may be the culprit - https://baseballrulesacademy.com/official-rule/nfhs/the-batter-turns-his-head-to-peek-at-the-catchers-signs/

It is definitely NOT specifically mentioned in either OBR 6.04 nor FED 3.3.1