Rule interpretation and application

Question
QUESTION: Dr. Ambrose,

Scenario:

One out, runners on 2nd and 3rd, the batter hits a line drive to shortstop and the shortstops catches the ball just off the ground; both runners leave their bases before the ball is caught.  The shortstop (after catching the ball) turns and throws to third in an attempt to double up the runner but throws the ball over the third baseman抯 head and into the dugout (or over the fence, and out of play).  The umpire signals 揹ead ball?and both runners advance without returning to their bases an tagging up.  

Question/opinion: I believe the umpire should have awarded both runners two bases (without mentioning they must first tag up), allowing both runs to score. The ball is dead when it leaves the field so no appeal can be made while time is out on the dead ball call. When the umpire calls 損lay ball? the defensive team抯 pitchers, could then back (stepping off backwards) off the pitchers rubber, and ask for an appeal at third (or second) because the runner left early and did not tag?the umpire would then call the runner out for leaving too soon and not tagging up, making it the third out of the inning and no runs would have been allowed to score.  Am I right?  

What happened is the umpire didn抰 know what to do and both coaches were asking for different rulings (one coach argued only one run should be allow to score on the overthrow and the other coach argued two runs should be allowed to score). The umpire simply put both runners back on their respective bases and called the batter-baserunner out on the caught line drive making it two outs.  This nullified the opportunity of the defensive team asking for an appeal on the runners leaving too soon and not tagging up.  

Had the umpire applied the rule correctly and awarded both runners two bases because of the overthrow entering dead ball territory, the offensive team would have scored two runs.   Had the defensive team appealed correctly, NO runs would have been allowed to score, and had the defensive team NOT appealed the runners leaving their bases early, without tagging up, the two runs would have counted.  Am I right?

I hope my question and comments are clear and I抣l wait for your response.  

Thanks in advance, Ron Osborn


ANSWER: Hi Ron,

You are 100% correct except for some procedures.

I believe the umpire should have awarded both runners two bases (without mentioning they must first tag up), allowing both runs to score.....

correct, I would call "dead ball" "runner on 3rd is awarded home, runner on 2nd is awarded home."  Now by rule the runners are required to re-touch the base left too soon or be liable to be called out on appeal, so they can (and should) go back, re-touch and then take the award.


The ball is dead when it leaves the field so no appeal can be made while time is out on the dead ball call.  

Incorrect... a dead ball appeal can be made by any infielder when the runner's complete their running assignments and the umpire calls "time".  Just because we have a dead ball doesn't mean we're in "time".

When the umpire calls 損lay ball? the defensive team抯 pitchers, could then back (stepping off backwards) off the pitchers rubber, and ask for an appeal at third (or second) because the runner left early and did not tag?br>
Not necessary (although it is legal because a pitch has not yet been thrown)as mentioned above, this procedure was the case about 20 years ago.

Had the umpire applied the rule correctly and awarded both runners two bases because of the overthrow entering dead ball territory, the offensive team would have scored two runs.....correct

Had the defensive team appealed correctly, NO runs would have been allowed to score...if they did not re-touch, correct.

and had the defensive team NOT appealed the runners leaving their bases early, without tagging up, the two runs would have counted....That is correct.

Hope this helps

Mark

---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Doc, got one for ya... weird. In reference my question above and your answer .. RS #43 read last paragraph.. It states that the appeal on a runner leaving a base too soon on a caught ball is a timed play, not a force and that any run (s) scored prior to the appeal count if it's the third out of the inning.  Strange! In my scenario above, it sounds like if the pitcher would have appealed the runner at second leaving too soon, the runner on third would have in fact scored and the run counted?  Help me out.  Thanks again, Ron Osborn

ANSWER: Hi Roy,

Sorry to take a little longer than usual to answer, when I read that, it didn't seem right and it's not.  It's either a typo or a mis-print.  I looked in my 2006 book and POE 43 (now rs) states "If the appeal results in the 3rd out any runner(s) preceding the appealed runner would score if they crossed the plate prior to the out.

The rule hasn't changed, no run shall score if the 3rd out...a preceding runner is declared out on an appeal play. 4-5b-3... 8-3-f tells us the same thing.

Plus we have 4-5-c that talks about a 4th out, no run shall be scored if the 4th out is a result of an appeal of a base missed or left too soon on a runner who has scored.  I know this isn't part of your question but the rule result is the same.  Bases loaded, 0 out, deep fly ball-caught and the out fielder falls down and injures themself.  All runners left early and score.  Appeal 1st, 2outs, appeal 2nd 3outs, it would seem r1 runs counts but it doesn't, appeal 3rd for the 4th out.

But in your case it doesn't matter because R2 is the 2nd out and R1 is the 3rd out, so R1 can't score in this situation because they are called out on appeal, 8-7-f

Mark



---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Thanks again... but in my scenario the caught line-drive was the second out and the appeal was the third out... but according to RS # 43, if they had appealed the runner on 2nd base leaving too soon and not tagging, instead of the runner on 3rd leaving and not tagging, the one run would have scored... this is an error I'm sure but how to fix it and how to expect an official to understand it is another story..

While we may have found a mistake?here is another one for you.. page 183 under the section of (playing rules and rules supplement index) .... SUSPENSION OF PLAY:  it references Rule 10, Section 8 Article A-1.. but rule 10 only has 4 sections... and there is NO Rule 10, Section 8?where can we email, call or write to get these brought to their attention and corrected?  

We could make a good team if I ever get caught up from the 10 years lapse I was away from the game and miss some of the changes that have taken place.  Thanks Ron Osborn

Answer
Hi Ron,

It looks to me like they moved 10-8 to 10-4 in the 2007 book and didn't change the index.  I haven't compared 06 to 07 yet but I'll check it out over the next few days.

As far as 43 is concerned they probably sent an email to all uics to correct it with their umpires as this book has been out for 10 months or so.  We'll see in the 08 book.

Thanks for the kind remarks

mark