Proper Appeal

[Mad Mike]

NFHS

NFHS allows both live and dead ball appeals. My question is related to what constitutes a proper live ball appeal on a runner who failed to tag up.

SITUATION: R1 and R3, 1 out. Batted ball to deep right field. Caught for out #2. R3 does not tag and scored. R2 tags up and advanced to second. Ball comes in from the outfield and is thrown to the pitcher. Pitcher engages the rubber. Pitcher, without disengaging, steps and throws to third. Third baseman, now in possession of the ball verbally appeals R3 leaving early. Is this a proper method to appeal?

Some umpires believe this is a balk and cancels the right to appeal (because third is no longer occupied and you can't throw to an unoccupied base without stepping back off the rubber).

If there are any casebook cites, interpretation cites, etc. please add those. I have a steak dinner riding on this!

[Velho]

9 minutes ago, Mad Mike said:

Some umpires wrongly believe this is a balk

FIFY 😁

We need ask if OP violates NFHS 6-2-4.b:

ART. 4 . . . Balk. If there is a runner or runners, any of the following acts by a pitcher while the pitcher is touching the pitcher's plate is a balk:

a. any feinting toward the batter or first base, or any dropping of the ball (even though accidental) and the ball does not cross afoul line (6-1-4);

b. failing to step with the non-pivot foot directly toward a base (occupied or unoccupied) when throwing or feinting there in an attempt to put out, or drive back a runner; or throwing or feinting to any unoccupied base when it is not an attempt to put out or drive back a runner;

 

I imagine there is a case play but I don't have access. (paging @Senor Azul on the courtesy phone)

[MadMax]

I know (like, in my baseball bones, I know) a pitcher can throw directly to a base for the purposes of an appeal. 

I found this: 

Quote

Even though a base may be unoccupied, it is legal for an engaged pitcher to throw to that base to make an appeal [(Rule 8.05 (d)].

And this: 

Quote

Another interpretation regarding Official Baseball Rule 6.02(a)(4) concerns appeal plays:
It is NOT a balk for the pitcher, while in contact with the rubber, to throw to an unoccupied base IF it is for the purpose of making an appeal play. (Note that the pitcher does not have to step back off the rubber to make an appeal play.)

And this: 

Quote

This is a common myth and one that leads to a lot of tiresome misplays. It is not a balk for the pitcher to throw to an unoccupied base for the purpose of making an appeal.Rule 6.02(a)(4)

These are likely all OBR citations, but I’m certain there’s a NFHS version. I just can’t find it ATM, challenged as I am by my resource facilities (on the road, on my phone, in a PF stretching room). 

As @Velho points out, I suspect that amateur umpires get this wrong because a combination of being so “keyed up” to get Balk calls, and situational un-awareness. Granted, in this OP, the F5 obviously implores or declares an appeal, verbally. Not every high school kid is going to do that. Most look at you (the umpire) like, “Yes? What now?”. If we (umpires) don’t know what’s being performed, ourselves, we jump on the most obvious call – “Balk!”. 

The key here is to stay aware of what’s going on in a game. R3 just advanced and scored on a caught fly ball… ya think the defensive team might want to appeal that? 🤔 

Actively use your verbal skills. At these amateur levels, I frequently tell the players – both teams – what the status of the ball is, Live or Dead. Even though the F1 does not have to disengage so as to throw to a base to make an appeal, I find that by telling the participants that the “Ball is Live, guys… ball is Live”, the players figure it out (faster) and just throw the ball to the base being appealed. Conversely, I’ll say that the ball is Dead, and the players (or coaches) start telling their F1 to get on the mound. I then say, “Glad you asked! Fed allows Dead ball appeals! Isn’t that cool? So what are you asking about?” 😎

[Senor Azul]

The OBR interpretation that Mr. MadMax posted earlier can be found in the 2021 MiLBUM (and also in the MLBUM) in section 6.27 on pages 118-119.

The NCAA actually has this in its rule 8-6b-10. According to the 2016 BRD, there's no FED provision and it recommends that we use the NCAA rule for high school games. 

I searched but couldn't find any FED case plays. The closest (and it's not that close) I found is current case book play 2.29.6 Situation B with a pitcher throwing to third for an appeal but it doesn't actually say the pitcher is engaged.

[The Man in Blue]

1 hour ago, Senor Azul said:

The OBR interpretation that Mr. MadMax posted earlier can be found in the 2021 MiLBUM (and also in the MLBUM) in section 6.27 on pages 118-119.

The NCAA actually has this in its rule 8-6b-10. According to the 2016 BRD, there's no FED provision and it recommends that we use the NCAA rule for high school games. 

I searched but couldn't find any FED case plays. The closest (and it's not that close) I found is current case book play 2.29.6 Situation B with a pitcher throwing to third for an appeal but it doesn't actually say the pitcher is engaged.

 

 

As much as I admire the work Carl Childress did, that terminology needs to disappear.  Do NOT apply rules from other codes.  NEVER do that.

The NFHS rule (cited above by @Velho) already does cover this and there is indeed a provision for this.  The pitcher is allowed to make this throw as it is "an attempt to put out or drive back a runner."  It is an appeal, not a direct play, but it is an effort to get the runner out.  Nothing in the rule states it must be a direct play on the runner.

[maven]

Velho posted the relevant part of the FED balk rule. It prohibits F1 from:

18 hours ago, Velho said:

throwing or feinting to any unoccupied base when it is not an attempt to put out or drive back a runner.

Making an appeal is an attempt to put out a (for now, scored) runner. Thus, F1's action is legal.

[Senor Azul]

I can quickly and easily find the following statement for OBR and NCAA:

An appeal is not to be interpreted as a play or an attempted play.

I think that would also apply to FED baseball as well. I will do a little research and come back later. But for now, Mr. maven, don't we have something of a conflict if we use the definition of a play as a definition of appeal?

[Tborze]

1 hour ago, Senor Azul said:

I can quickly and easily find the following statement for OBR and NCAA:

An appeal is not to be interpreted as a play or an attempted play.

I think that would also apply to FED baseball as well. I will do a little research and come back later. But for now, Mr. maven, don't we have something of a conflict if we use the definition of a play as a definition of appeal?

Isn’t that only for the purpose of making multiple appeals?  
An appeal is after all an attempt to retire a runner. 

[Senor Azul]

NFHS case book play 2.29.6 Situation B:

Ruling:..."Because an appeal is not a play..."

Two different definitions of the terms--why use them interchangeably?

[Senor Azul]

From the 2016 BRD (p. 27):

14  APPEALS:  PITCHER THROWS FROM PITCHER'S PLATE 

FED:  No provision. Treat as in NCAA.

NCAA:  It is not a balk if the pitcher from the rubber throws to a base for an appeal. (8-6b-10)

This section has been in the BRD since 1992 yet Mr. Childress didn't figure out that FED rule 6-2-4b was all that was needed. 

[MadMax]

31 minutes ago, Senor Azul said:

This section has been in the BRD since 1992 yet Mr. Childress didn't figure out that FED rule 6-2-4b was all that was needed. 

This isn’t directed at _you_, Azul… Mr. Childress cannot anticipate, nor prevent, state / association heads / leads making their own interpretations, whether that be without knowledge of Childress (I think we can agree that most leads should know, or at least acknowledge Childress), ignorance, or blatant disregard. 

I’ve had plenty of umpires over the years report to me, after sitting in their state / association meeting(s), that their lead(s) discussed a rule, and the applied interpretation and direction (by the lead) broke with expectation, or established, understood practices. And these weren’t new POEs or edicts from the Fed. Either the lead was (stubbornly) resolute that his interpretation was the one to use, case closed, or he lacked that fortitude, and a discussion would erupt, with no clear (correct) consensus. 

Feral and Viral Umpiring are very real things. 

[The Man in Blue]

5 hours ago, Senor Azul said:

I can quickly and easily find the following statement for OBR and NCAA:

An appeal is not to be interpreted as a play or an attempted play.

I think that would also apply to FED baseball as well. I will do a little research and come back later. But for now, Mr. maven, don't we have something of a conflict if we use the definition of a play as a definition of appeal?

I missed something … why are we distinguishing between an appeal and a play? 
 

The relevant rule (as was established) does not reference either.

[Tborze]

1 hour ago, Senor Azul said:

NFHS case book play 2.29.6 Situation B:

Ruling:..."Because an appeal is not a play..."

Two different definitions of the terms--why use them interchangeably?

Good point!  I missed it earlier. 

FWIW 2.29.6 B should be R2 not R1. 

I would say an appeal is not a play. A play is an attempt to retire or drive back a runner. 6-2-4b 
An appeal is a request to rule on a baserunning infraction. (No runner)
Because an appeal is not a play, which would invalidate the appeal, the defense would not lose its right to make multiple appeals.  
 

11 minutes ago, Senor Azul said:

From the 2016 BRD (p. 27):

14  APPEALS:  PITCHER THROWS FROM PITCHER'S PLATE 

FED:  No provision. Treat as in NCAA.

NCAA:  It is not a balk if the pitcher from the rubber throws to a base for an appeal. (8-6b-10)

This section has been in the BRD since 1992 yet Mr. Childress didn't figure out that FED rule 6-2-4b was all that was needed. 

6-2-4b doesn’t address an appeal (why?) Could it be because this rule doesn’t apply?  Balk. If there is a runner or runners…

So if there is no runner/runners, how can it be a balk?! Lol

Therefore, you cannot balk during an appeal!? 
 

Just talking out loud!  
 

10 minutes ago, The Man in Blue said:

I missed something … why are we distinguishing between an appeal and a play? 
 

The relevant rule (as was established) does not reference either.

Exactly!  I think  lol 

 

 

 

 

[Jimurray]

19 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

 

 

As much as I admire the work Carl Childress did, that terminology needs to disappear.  Do NOT apply rules from other codes.  NEVER do that.

 

If I recall there is an NCAA interp, or recommendation, or advice that if their rules can not be applied to a sit then use OBR.

[The Man in Blue]

4 hours ago, Tborze said:

6-2-4b doesn’t address an appeal (why?) Could it be because this rule doesn’t apply?  Balk. If there is a runner or runners…

 

You are approaching that wrong.  The only need to address something directly is because it wouldn't apply.  Since it is not called out as a distinction, it applies.

Why do we always seem to want to pick and choose what "non-examples" we want to ignore or follow (rather than think through the logic and spirit of the game)?  "Nothing says the pitcher can't do that -- legal!"  "Nothing says an appeal is included -- illegal!"

4 hours ago, Tborze said:

I would say an appeal is not a play. A play is an attempt to retire or drive back a runner. 6-2-4b 
An appeal is a request to rule on a baserunning infraction. (No runner)

No, Blue!  I don't want him called out; I just want him to apologize!   (It is an attempt to retire a runner, posthumously, if you will.) 

[The Man in Blue]

2 hours ago, Jimurray said:

If I recall there is an NCAA interp, or recommendation, or advice that if their rules can not be applied to a sit then use OBR.

I don't call NCAA, just read the rule book, so I won't disagree.

I will amend my statement: absent explicit instruction, DO NOT DO THAT. 

Do not hang your hat on "a guy online told me an almost ten-year old book full of private conversations and e-mails said to do this, and we are pretty sure somebody else somewhere else at some other time confirmed it."  😉

[Jimurray]

34 minutes ago, The Man in Blue said:

I don't call NCAA, just read the rule book, so I won't disagree.

I will amend my statement: absent explicit instruction, DO NOT DO THAT. 

Do not hang your hat on "a guy online told me an almost ten-year old book full of private conversations and e-mails said "BRD recommends", and we are pretty sure somebody else somewhere else at some other time confirmed it."  😉

 

[The Man in Blue]

@Jimurray, we are umpire nerds. 

We are among a very small percentage of umpires who know what the BRD even is.  No, I typically don't cite it to people outside of this forum.  😉

[Jimurray]

4 minutes ago, The Man in Blue said:

@Jimurray, we are umpire nerds. 

We are among a very small percentage of umpires who know what the BRD even is.  No, I typically don't cite it to people outside of this forum.  😉

"Rulebook Umpire" can be a term of derision by weak rule umpires implying your game skills are weak but you and I and others on this site know that you can be good on all facets of the game.