So.. which one was out again?

[Dano]

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=10591941

[iamdabobo]

There are a few things odd about this, methinks.

1. The returning runner was tagged while he was off the base, so why was the runner standing on 3B out? Or was it because the returning runner was returning to 2B after touching 3B, therefore they passed each other, so the following runner was out? In that case, why weren't they both out? I don't understand this call at all.

2. How was the runner out of the baseline? PU motions that he was 'way out,' but there was no play being made until the very end, at which point he is making a straight line towards the plate, so what's up with that?

[KenGibes]

How was the runner out of the baseline? PU motions that he was 'way out,' but there was no play being made until the very end, at which point he is making a straight line towards the plate, so what's up with that?

Considering the outcome of the play, it's pretty hard to figure out what the thinking was on the calls. But, I don't think this was an 'out of basepath' out at home. Rather, I think the HPU was signaling that R3 had considered himself out at 3B and was heading off the field towards his dugout. I guess this would be an abandonment out?

How R1 got called out at 3B is beyond me. Clearly, R3 was no longer on the bag when R1 was tagged. The only possibility (besides a blown call) I can think of is that maybe U3 considered R1 to have passed R3 when R3 left 3B the last time. (R3 takes a step or two towards 2B before turning back into the infield.)

I sure would like to know the reasoning behind the call at 3B.

[Richard_Siegel]

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=10591941

When both runners occupied 3B they were both tagged and U3 immediately pointed to the trialing runner and said "He's out!" However, the lead runner must have assumed he was out and didn't wait to see who was out. He just peeled off to leave the field believing that he was out. Since the lead runner was tagged on 3B when he was entitled to occupy 3B that tag means nothing.

I believe the PU was calling the runner out at home for abandonment. The arm motion he used is not the mechanic for "out of the baseline." That mechcaninc look exactly like "safe off the bag," a sweeping motion using both hands.

"The lead runner was leaving the field believing that he was out." That is almost word-for-word text from the abandonment rule.

The video did not show it, but I would have both runners out on that play. Did anyone get the box score to find out what was ruled?

[travlinmatt]

I pulled up the box score from this game and read the official scorers notes. They are as follows:
Fielder's Choice P; Maier out at Hm/C-3B-P; Betancourt to 3B/Adv on throw; Blanco to 2B

The umpires called only the lead runner out. My assumption therefore is that it was determined that Maier, the lead runner, was off the base when tagged, and was the runner declared out at 3rd. The play was confusing because the 3rd base umpire was not very clear in his out mechanic as to which player was out.

-Matt

[Richard_Siegel]

.... .... The play was confusing because the 3rd base umpire was not very clear in his out mechanic as to which player was out.

-Matt

You gotta be kidding me. The 3rd base umpire was perfectly clear in his out mechanic as to which player was out.

His mechaninc was straight out of umpire school. If you look at the video (do it with no sound) you will see the 3rd base umpire point direct at the body of the trailling runner (he practically touches his right shoulder with his finger) and says (I assume) "You're out!" while doing a strong out mechanic right in front of his face.

In pro school, when two runners are tagged while on the same base, the umpire is taught to approach the two runners and get to within an arms length away from them. Then point at the retired runner and a say, "You! You're out!" while doing a out mechaninc, and then quickly point at the other runner ans say, "You! You're safe!" while doing a safe mechaninc. It is done this way (getting up close to the runners) so there is no doubt as to which runner the umpire is pointing as he rules who is safe and out.

In this case, the guy that was suppose to be safe ran away as soon as he was tagged! By the time the 3rd base umpire was ready to point at him he was gone!

[Solsaa]

You gotta be kidding me. The 3rd base umpire was perfectly clear in his out mechanic as to which player was out.

His mechaninc was straight out of umpire school. If you look at the video (do it with no sound) you will see the 3rd base umpire point direct at the body of the trailling runner (he practically touches his right shoulder with his finger) and says (I assume) "You're out!" while doing a strong out mechanic right in front of his face.

In pro school, when two runners are tagged while on the same base, the umpire is taught to approach the two runners and get to within an arms length away from them. Then point at the retired runner and a say, "You! You're out!" while doing a out mechaninc, and then quickly point at the other runner ans say, "You! You're safe!" while doing a safe mechaninc. It is done this way (getting up close to the runners) so there is no doubt as to which runner the umpire is pointing as he rules who is safe and out.

In this case, the guy that was suppose to be safe ran away as soon as he was tagged! By the time the 3rd base umpire was ready to point at him he was gone!


Correct, however you give the calls in the same order as the tags.

[travlinmatt]

Richard,

I stand corrected. I did re-watch the video, and you are right, the umpire was very clear in pointing at the trailing runner to call him out. This was much more clear on the replay from behind the 3rd base umpire. After looking up the box score I rewatched only the 1st part of the video, and added in some assumptions (a risk to be certain...), and "saw" what I perceived to be less than clear, but it was in fact definitive. But now this fact creates more confusion for me (and I assume others knowing the final ruling...)

I have to ask, if the umpire clearly called him out, what is your interpretation as to what occurred that allowed him to remain at 3rd base and only the lead runner was called out? I look forward to hearing your thoughts. Thanks.

-Matt

[BrianC14]

But Richard, the tag on Betancourt comes while Meier is not in contact with the bag. They tag Meier as he appears to have given up, and starts his 'peel off' maneuver.

[Richard_Siegel]

Correct, however you give the calls in the same order as the tags.That's right!

[Richard_Siegel]

But Richard, the tag on Betancourt comes while Meier is not in contact with the bag. They tag Meier as he appears to have given up, and starts his 'peel off' maneuver.

Although it does not look that way to me, that is the only explanation that fits the box score notes above.

[thunderheads]

this was covered last week in another post .......

Hohn (u3) is looking DOWN at feet, and NOT at tags, ...he's ASSUMING both were tagged while on 3rd, thus, Betancourt being signaled as out.

The write up we found, and final ruling/ decision was, Maier was out for abandonment.

Not my rule, ....just what they SAY they ruled....let me go find it :)

ON EDIT: Sorry, it was on the 'empire' forums, ...I posted it! ;)
http://umpire-empire.com/forum/showthread.php?t=29715

[BrianC14]

Although it does not look that way to me, that is the only explanation that fits the box score notes above.

There isn't nearly enough room in a box score to explain how FUBAR this all is.

Bear in mind that they reversed the out call on Betancourt - - that was why Geren argued and was dumped. (He wanted two outs on the play).

[hiller]

From what I see Maier is out on the tag by third base, nothing else matters after that.

U3 (Hohn) is caught too close to third base when observing this play. Multiple fielders, multiple runners and mutilple tags right in Hohn's face. Can't see all that at once when standing that close.

[BrianC14]

From what I see Maier is out on the tag by third base, nothing else matters after that.

U3 (Hohn) is caught too close to third base when observing this play. Multiple fielders, multiple runners and mutilple tags right in Hohn's face. Can't see all that at once when standing that close.

He also doesn't see that Betancourt could be called out for passing the preceding runner (Maier).
Maier's step toward 2B as he peels off to his right puts Betancourt ahead of him.

[hiller]

He also doesn't see that Betancourt could be called out for passing the preceding runner (Maier).
Maier's step toward 2B as he peels off to his right puts Betancourt ahead of him.

Possible. Hard to tell from that angle. The tag on Maier may have happened prior to him returning passed Betancourt. Again, tough angle.

[BrianC14]

Possible. Hard to tell from that angle. The tag on Maier may have happened prior to him returning passed Betancourt. Again, tough angle.

Well right before Maier is tagged, he's on the second base side of third, and not touching 3B. It's at that point that Meier is tagged.

http://i1001.photobucket.com/albums/af133/BC14_photos/rundown.jpg?t=1281470843

(Thanks to Thunderheads who posted this pic at www.umpire-empire.com (http://www.umpire-empire.com) )

Maybe if Hohn got a bit closer.... ;)

[denimvest]

Maybe if Hohn got a bit closer.... ;)
http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m93/aelogan/Emoticons/7c71d817.gif

Hohn: "Wait, was that distance over angle, or angle over distance...?"

[BrianC14]

http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m93/aelogan/Emoticons/7c71d817.gif

Hohn: "Wait, was that distance over angle, or angle over distance...?"


http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m93/aelogan/Emoticons/7c71d817.gifhttp://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m93/aelogan/Emoticons/7c71d817.gif

And so much for "keep your eyes everlastingly on the ball". :rolleyes:

[Richard_Siegel]

He also doesn't see that Betancourt could be called out for passing the preceding runner (Maier).
Maier's step toward 2B as he peels off to his right puts Betancourt ahead of him.

This is very unlikely. To be passing the runner would have to be trying to get back to 2B. The runner was not going to 2B, he was going to his dugout near HP on the 1B side.

I have seen situations where a runner in 1B is returning to the bag because the ball the batter just hit is going to be caught. Meanwhile the BR is bust it to 1B and actually has overrun 1B while R1 is on and/or just about to step on the bag. During this the outfielder fails to make the catch! R1 is on 1B. The BR has overrun 1B and is 10 past the base down the RF line. Is that passing? This is a simliar sitiation but it is not passing, unless the BR turns right and starts for 2B while R1 is still at the base. As long as the BR stops or comes directly back to the base as R1 is gets going to 2B we have nothing.

[BrianC14]

This is very unlikely. To be passing the runner would have to be trying to get back to 2B. The runner was not going to 2B, he was going to his dugout near HP on the 1B side.

I have seen situations where a runner in 1B is returning to the bag because the ball the batter just hit is going to be caught. Meanwhile the BR is bust it to 1B and actually has overrun 1B while R1 is on and/or just about to step on the bag. During this the outfielder fails to make the catch! R1 is on 1B. The BR has overrun 1B and is 10 past the base down the RF line. Is that passing? This is a simliar sitiation but it is not passing, unless the BR turns right and starts for 2B while R1 is still at the base. As long as the BR stops or comes directly back to the base as R1 is gets going to 2B we have nothing.

Can't agree with you there. The definition of "passing" is pretty clear, and there's no distinction about a particular runner going back to any base. Sure, there are some "case plays" that help to illustrate what passing consists of, but those case plays don't cover every situation.

And at that point in this play, there's no telling WHAT Meier is doing - he sure isn't "heading to his dugout", given that his dugout is behind him; and even if he were, the path he took placed R3 ahead of him - and Meier hasn't been tagged out yet.

This situation isn't the same at all (as your situation calls for it) - primarily because in your situtation, the B/R has not attempted to go to 2B, so he cannot be guilty of passing R1.
In this situation, R2 is now standing on 3B, while R3 is between 2B and 3B. R2 has now passed R3 - whether it's intentional or not is irrelevant per the rule. R2 has now obtained 3B, and R3 is now behind R2.