Another Safety base situation

[BLWizzRanger]

This happened this weekend.  Under 18 showcase so they weren't playing for anything but we were using college rules for safety bag during this play.  Well, it wasn't really mentioned which safety bag rules were used, but, the bag was there and we were on a college field. lol

BR runs down the line on a hit to F4. BR properly touches safety bag on the way through and makes no moves toward second base.  F4 throws wide and gets past F3 but F2 is backing up.  The defensive team gets a notion that the BR makes a move toward 2nd and tries to tag him.

As the BR goes back to the bag, he is tagged by a fielder (I can't remember which fielder tagged him - not important). As the tag is being placed on him, he touches the safety base and stops because the fielder making the tag is in his way.  Once the tag is off of him, he touches the proper bag.  

Defensive team wanted the runner out because he was being tagged as he stopped at the safety bag.   

So I call the BR safe as the original tag was for predicated on false information and the BR stopped where he did because there was someone in his way.  He was still making his way back to the base 'immediately' after passing first base in my judgement.  On further thought, this seemed like another 'excuse me' appeal here where they just happened to be applying a tag for making a turn but weren't appealing or making a play of touching the improper bag at the time.

Just questioning myself on this one... what are the thoughts on this?

 

[The Man in Blue]

I'll say the same thing I said on the LL call . . . 

If the colored bag was not there, the runner would not be touching anything and would still be considered as making their way to back to the white bag while protected . . . so why the heck would you consider stepping on the colored portion as some sort of violation?

[grayhawk]

10 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

I'll say the same thing I said on the LL call . . . 

If the colored bag was not there, the runner would not be touching anything and would still be considered as making their way to back to the white bag while protected . . . so why the heck would you consider stepping on the colored portion as some sort of violation?

This is how it was explained to us on a zoom this season. Once you touch the orange bag on a play like this, the orange bag is now dirt. It doesn't exist. So if you come back and step on the orange bag, you are stepping on dirt.

[Velho]

11 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

I'll say the same thing I said on the LL call . . . 

This is the one being referenced

 

[LC Ump]

12 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

I'll say the same thing I said on the LL call . . . 

If the colored bag was not there, the runner would not be touching anything and would still be considered as making their way to back to the white bag while protected . . . so why the heck would you consider stepping on the colored portion as some sort of violation?

This is how this issue was addressed by LL for all baseball regional and WS umpires after the confusion in the LL softball regionals. No violation.

Unless there was an attempt to advance to second, the runner was to still be deemed as "immediately" making their way back to the first base even if they briefly "detoured" via the orange.

[Velho]

39 minutes ago, LC Ump said:

This is how this issue was addressed by LL for all baseball regional and WS umpires after the confusion in the LL softball regionals. No violation.

👍 They gave a lot of grace during baseball regionals (this was 2 weeks after the above video)

 

[LC Ump]

Since this play in involves a runner making an attempt to advance to second (not one where the runner returns immediately) it definitely raises the question of why he was allowed to return to anything but the white base...and why no one on the defensive team seems to have asked.

[The Man in Blue]

2 hours ago, Velho said:

👍 They gave a lot of grace during baseball regionals (this was 2 weeks after the above video)

 

 

LLBWS Regional Double First Base 2025-08-04.mov 40.76 MB · 1 download

44 minutes ago, LC Ump said:

Since this play in involves a runner making an attempt to advance to second (not one where the runner returns immediately) it definitely raises the question of why he was allowed to return to anything but the white base...and why no one on the defensive team seems to have asked.

 

Quoting those to make sure it is clear which one you are referring to (I wasn't sure at first).

I agree on this one . . . he should have been called out since he did make a move for second.

[Velho]

1 hour ago, LC Ump said:

and why no one on the defensive team seems to have asked.

DC did ask. Discussed with U1 and play carried on. I trimmed it to make it postable.

[LC Ump]

25 minutes ago, Velho said:

DC did ask. Discussed with U1 and play carried on. I trimmed it to make it postable.

Thanks for clarifying that. Good for the DC.

Only other recourse would have been for U1 to ask for a crew consultation, which would have been understandable given that this was a play involving a rule LL made mandatory for regional and WS play only a week or so before those games started.

[SeeingEyeDog]

It's VERY clear in most codes with the double first base that additional language is needed to cover more unusual and irregular situations...I don't know where we would be without rules interpreters great and small, national and local. Things like this should not be left in the hands of the interpreters. I'm concerned about what the 2026 NFHS book will look like on this. Fortunately, implementation is 2027 so, hopefully they are collecting information and adjusting the book as necessary for 2027...

~Dawg

[BLWizzRanger]

10 hours ago, Velho said:

This is the one being referenced

 

Thanks!  This is the one I was looking for to see how similar my situation was with this... and my ruling was mostly influenced by this and the thread at that time.  But, mine was a little different with a tag attempt for moving toward second base....  

[The Man in Blue]

On 9/1/2025 at 8:29 PM, SeeingEyeDog said:

It's VERY clear in most codes with the double first base that additional language is needed to cover more unusual and irregular situations...I don't know where we would be without rules interpreters great and small, national and local. Things like this should not be left in the hands of the interpreters. I'm concerned about what the 2026 NFHS book will look like on this. Fortunately, implementation is 2027 so, hopefully they are collecting information and adjusting the book as necessary for 2027...

~Dawg

Unlike most codes, NFHS already has an internal reference point they can use. Softball has used the double-base for quite some time.

Whether they will wisely use that as a start point or not is yet to be seen.

I know many people do not like my position on this, but if NFHS wants to expand their umpire pool, bringing baseball and softball rules into alignment (where they can) would go a long way.

As for the rule itself … KISS.  Some codes go way down into the murky depths and unnecessarily complicate it.  

[SeeingEyeDog]

4 minutes ago, The Man in Blue said:

Unlike most codes, NFHS already has an internal reference point they can use. Softball has used the double-base for quite some time.

Whether they will wisely use that as a start point or not is yet to be seen.

I know many people do not like my position on this, but if NFHS wants to expand their umpire pool, bringing baseball and softball rules into alignment (where they can) would go a long way.

As for the rule itself … KISS.  Some codes go way down into the murky depths and unnecessarily complicate it.  

Great post, as always @The Man in Blue...and with apologies to @BLWizzRanger for the hijack, it's ironic that you mention softball.

One of the things I enjoy most when I umpire up at Cooperstown is meeting and speaking with umpires from all over the world and hearing about the culture of umpiring and baseball in general in their home markets and comparing that with that of my own. I was having a beer one night with some guys out of Western New York who said they are struggling to cover all the baseball there because most umpires there prefer to work softball because it's a stronger value for them in terms of time versus revenue. This was very eye opening for me and perfectly logical.

Meanwhile, in my market...we have some umpires that work both sports but, there's not this preference for softball.

~Dawg

[The Man in Blue]

When I first started, it felt as if there were quite a few umpires in my area who did both.  Over the years, that has felt as if it has really changed.  That could just be anecdotal as I met more umpires over the years. 

Typically, it has seemed umpires give up baseball and move to softball for two reasons: chasing the dollar (as you mention) or just getting older and trying to stay on the field.

Another possibility: Softball had (past tense) a more organized and stable presence in the summer here, so recruiting was happening more on the softball side.  Guys came in on softball (I did) and stayed there (I didn't).

Our state association has gone to giving you your second sport for free in an effort to encourage officials to pick up a second sport.  Baseball-softball feels as if it should be a natural segue, yet many baseball umpires won't work softball (they just don't take the second sport) and many softball umpires select volleyball for their second.  Not wanting to learn a second set of rules that is so close to their primary is something I have heard umpires mention as to why they won't cross over.

Going back to a beating my broken drum . . . too many games in both sports is also allowing umpires to easily forego one for the other.  There are always games needing covered.

[BLWizzRanger]

1 hour ago, SeeingEyeDog said:

and with apologies to @BLWizzRanger for the hijack, 

 

 

I know not what this word 'hijack' means... 

[Velho]

3 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

Going back to a beating my broken drum . . . too many games in both sports is also allowing umpires to easily forego one for the other.  There are always games needing covered.

I just explained this to our softball side in trying to prep them for few/no softball umpires for fall ball (I took over as league UIC and we have both baseball and softball). It's a conversation I expect to have often.

[The Man in Blue]

4 hours ago, BLWizzRanger said:

 

I know not what this word 'hijack' means... 

 

You say "hijack", I say "exercise in intellectual deviation."