BR misses 1st with two outs

[umpgent]

OK ... for the 14th time ...

OBR R2 2 out.

Batter hits a gapper, rounds 1st, stops on 2B.
R2 scores (apparently).

Defense appeals that BR missed 1B.
Appeal is upheld and inning is over.
Does the run count?

Please answer only with the appropriate rule sources.
Anything that refers to a force play is not helpful.
By definition there is never a force at 1B
(although that's an error in the rule book)

[CoachJM]

umpgent,

No, the run does not score.

4.09(a) Exception 1.

Pretty elementary.

JM

P.S. No, it is NOT an error in the rulebook - you just don't understand what a "force play" is. You might want to read Rule 2.0 "Force Play" while you're at it.

Originally Posted by OBR

4.09 HOW A TEAM SCORES

(a) One run shall be scored each time a runner legally advances to touches first, second, third, and home base before three men are put out to end the inning. EXCEPTION; a run is not scored if the runner advances to home base during a play in which the third out is made (1) by the batter-runner before he touches first base, (2) by any runner being forced out, or (3) by a preceding runner who is declared out because he failed to touch one of the bases.

APPROVED RULING: no run shall score during a play in which the third out is made be the batter-runner before he touches first base.

Example: one out, Jones on second, Smith on first. The batter, Brown, hits safely, Jones scores, Smith is out on the throw to the plate. Two outs. But Brown missed first base. The ball is thrown to first, an appeal is made, and Brown is out. Three outs. Since Jones crossed the plate duing a play in which the third out was made by the last batter-runner before he touched first base, Jones's run does not count.

No disrespect, but this can be found by reading the rule book. Sometimes we have to do our own homework if we want to be a competant umpire. It wouldn't have gotten to the "2nd time" had due dilligence been done.

[umpgent]

Congratulations ... you have both missed the point.
And evidently neither of you understand that the rulebook is grossly in error on how it defines a force play. (Ask any of the moderators who do understand this)

I didn't make this post because I didn't know the answer, I made the post because it came up (for the 14th time) in a game on Saturday, and this scenario is still misunderstood by many coaches - even at the High School level.

4.09 is on the money. Part of the problem, in my opinion, are the myths that are generated ... partly due to the poor wording in other sections of the OBR book.

Save the scolding for your children, guys.

[Rich_Ives]

Originally Posted by umpgent

Congratulations ... you have both missed the point.
And evidently neither of you understand that the rulebook is grossly in error on how it defines a force play.

Missed what point? The rules (4.09(a) Exception (1)) and the approved rulings CLEARLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY say no run can score if the BR is the third out for missing first base. What do you think the point is?

Why do you think the definition of a force play is "grossly in error"?

[CoachJM]

Originally Posted by umpgent

Congratulations ... you have both missed the point.
And evidently neither of you understand that the rulebook is grossly in error on how it defines a force play. (Ask any of the moderators who do understand this)

I didn't make this post because I didn't know the answer, I made the post because it came up (for the 14th time) in a game on Saturday, and this scenario is still misunderstood by many coaches - even at the High School level.

Part of the problem, in my opinion, are the myths that are generated ... partly due to the poor working of the OBR book.

Save the scolding for your children, guys.

umpgent,

I eagerly await your instruction on what the "point" is and what the "gross error" in the defintion of a "force play" is.

Oh, and for clarification, was that the 14th time in your Saturday game, the 14th time this season, or the 14th time in your life that "'this' has come up"?

JM

[Ozzy]

If the third out is made either by a force or the batter-runner not legally attaining 1st base, the run shall not score.

In your scenario, the batter-runner never attained 1st base (he missed it and was properly appealed).

Now, wise a$$! I gave you the ruling - go look up the rule yourself!

So your contention is that the rule book errors in defining a "force play." It has been documented that there are over 200 errors and/or conflicts in the rules as they are written. You want to impress me? Cite them all.

[heyblue26]

This is getting heated and some one is going to get ejected. WoW!!!!

[loulou]

lets restict them 1st

[dileonardoja]

Originally Posted by umpgent

Congratulations ... you have both missed the point.
And evidently neither of you understand that the rulebook is grossly in error on how it defines a force play. (Ask any of the moderators who do understand this)

I didn't make this post because I didn't know the answer, I made the post because it came up (for the 14th time) in a game on Saturday, and this scenario is still misunderstood by many coaches - even at the High School level.

4.09 is on the money. Part of the problem, in my opinion, are the myths that are generated ... partly due to the poor wording in other sections of the OBR book.

Save the scolding for your children, guys.

It has come up for the 14th time because believe it or not, most coaches themselves don't understand the rules. What is the problem here Umpgent (which it appears is an oxymoron)? The rules citation is correct. The Example is taken right from the OBR book is almost verbatim the play you describe. Again I ask, what point are you trying to make?

[Richard_Siegel]

Originally Posted by umpgent

Congratulations ... you have both missed the point.
And evidently neither of you understand that the rulebook is grossly in error on how it defines a force play. (Ask any of the moderators who do understand this)

I didn't make this post because I didn't know the answer, I made the post because it came up (for the 14th time) in a game on Saturday, and this scenario is still misunderstood by many coaches - even at the High School level.

4.09 is on the money. Part of the problem, in my opinion, are the myths that are generated ... partly due to the poor wording in other sections of the OBR book.

Save the scolding for your children, guys.

I am a moderator and I believe I understand this. The rulebook is not in error and, by definition of "force," the out on a batter is never a "force out" at first base. A force is when a RUNNER loses his right to occupy a base because the batter has become a runner. Hence the batter can not force himself. The purpose of this distinction is because the "force" can be removed from a runner who can then return to his TOP base, but the batter must always go to 1B. On a play where the third out is recorded, no runs can score if the batter does not reach 1B safely, or another runner who is forced to advance is put out before he reaches his advance base. So as a practical matter, if you want to call the out on the batter a "force out," you are OK because the effect of the rule is the same. It is really a matter of semantics, but the rulebook is not in error.

[Dano]

Originally Posted by Richard_Siegel

I am a moderator and I believe I understand this. The rulebook is not in error and, by definition of "force," the out on a batter is never a "force out" at first base. A force is when a RUNNER loses his right to occupy a base because the batter has become a runner. Hence the batter can not force himself. The purpose of this distinction is because the "force" can be removed from a runner who can then return to his TOP base, but the batter must always go to 1B. On a play where the third out is recorded, no runs can score if the batter does not reach 1B safely, or another runner who is forced to advance is put out before he reaches his advance base. So as a practical matter, if you want to call the out on the batter a "force out," you are OK because the effect of the rule is the same. It is really a matter of semantics, but the rulebook is not in error.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
And that ladies and gents, is why Richard is a moderator AND a Jedi Master of umpiring!