Appeal on runner leaving early

Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch

Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.

Jun 6, 2016
2,714
113
Chicago
So I think I'm a little unsure on what the difference is between, say, a line drive where the runners get doubled off and this play. You see double plays (or triple plays) like this all the time where a fielder catches a ball in the air and then throws back to the base(s) where runners didn't tag.

What about tagging/leaves early is different?
 
Aug 12, 2014
644
43
So I think I'm a little unsure on what the difference is between, say, a line drive where the runners get doubled off and this play. You see double plays (or triple plays) like this all the time where a fielder catches a ball in the air and then throws back to the base(s) where runners didn't tag.

What about tagging/leaves early is different?

Exactly my question.
 
Jun 22, 2008
3,731
113
I already stated if it is unmistakable why the defense threw the ball to third it should be treated as a live ball appeal. Otherwise if there is any doubt by the umpire the defense needs to explain what they are appealing.
 
Aug 12, 2014
644
43
But why does it matter whether or not it's clear why they are doing it as long as they actually do it?

I'm trying to think of a similar example and here's the best I can come up with (this actually happened in a game I coached). Runner on second, gb to SS. The shortstop never looked at the runner or even thought about her, but in the process of reaching back to start her throw, she happened to tagged the runner with the ball. There was no intent whatsoever to tag the runner, yet the out was called because the mechanics of the out were completed.

I'm not trying to be snarky or anything, I'm genuinely trying to understand why intent matters when a runner leaves early. I really appreciate you taking the time to reply and explain.
 
Jun 22, 2008
3,731
113
I wasnt there and did not see the play so I have absolutely no idea why the umpire did not accept the throw to 3rd as a live ball appeal. Perhaps the runner at 2nd made a juke for 3rd drawing a throw or possibly the umpire was not aware of the rule on live ball appeals, I have no idea.

Putting a runner out by accidentally tagging them or accidentally stepping on a base with the ball on a force out meets all the requirements of putting a runner out but are not appeal plays. Appeals must be deliberate and made known to the umpire why the appeal is being made. As I have already said, on fly outs many times the ball is thrown directly back to the base trying to double off the runner but it is usually completely obvious to everyone in the park why the ball is being thrown. The runner left early, a fly ball was caught and the runner is desperately trying to return to the base to tag as the throw is coming. Everyone including the umpires knows exactly what is going on. Say 2 runners missed 3rd base advancing home. The defense makes an appeal and just says "she missed the base". Do you think the umpire should just call both runners out? How does the umpire know which runner they are appealing? Maybe the defense thought they saw runner 1 miss 3rd when in reality they actually did touch the base but they did not see the other 2 runners actually miss.

It is simply the rules of the game, appeals must be deliberate and it must be clear to the umpire what is being appealed. There are also slight differences in the appeal process between rule sets. NFHS allows a coach to make verbal appeals, USA requires the players on the field to make appeals.
 
Oct 25, 2013
90
8
DFW Area
Not necessarily true. The rule states it is an IF if the umpires judges an infielder, catcher or pitcher "can" make the catch with ordinary effort. There is no requirement that negates the ruling because the player does not make the catch more difficult than originally judged.

The assumption was that it was the case of the ball not initially within 'ordinary effort' reach, not that it was misjudged and "should" have been ordinary effort.
 
Aug 12, 2014
644
43
Comp, I appreciate you taking the time to reply. I've never thought of this as an appeal similar to a runner missing a base. I've always thought of it as equivalent to a force out. That's why I didn't understand why intent matters.

In regards to the IF not being called, I didn't intend for that to be part of the discussion, I just included it for clarity. IMO it was the correct call.
 
Last edited:

MTR

Jun 22, 2008
3,438
48
The assumption was that it was the case of the ball not initially within 'ordinary effort' reach, not that it was misjudged and "should" have been ordinary effort.

None of which was included in the parameters of the play offered. I simply addressed the point that an infielder making what seems to be a difficult play does not negate the possibility of an infield fly.
 

MTR

Jun 22, 2008
3,438
48
Comp, I appreciate you taking the time to reply. I've never thought of this as an appeal similar to a runner missing a base. I've always thought of it as equivalent to a force out.

FYI, it is impossible to have a force out on a ball caught in flight.
 
Aug 12, 2014
644
43
FYI, it is impossible to have a force out on a ball caught in flight.

Yes, I know. I'm just saying that the concept is the same - if the fielder tags the base before the runner gets there then the runner is out. Obviously it's not exactly the same - in one the runner is advancing to a base and in the other she is returning to the base - but it's the same idea.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
42,830
Messages
679,478
Members
21,445
Latest member
Bmac81802
Top