Posted on 10/14/2005 7:57:37 AM PDT by nikos1121
That's the problem w/your scenario -- if either the batter is thrown out at 1st or the runner is forced at 2nd, it makes no difference if the runner on 3rd has crossed the plate or not. Force plays end the inning, period.
For your scenario to take place, the fielder would have to specifically first tag the runner running from 1st and then throw the batter out to prevent the run from counting, thus 4 outs. Granted that weird things happen, and anyone can have a brain fart, there's no infielder in MLB that would do this. After all, if an infielder has the ball in hand, he is certainly capable of throwing it to a base, and if he doesn't have the ball in hand he can't tag the runner.
That's why I'm saying your scenario is moot.
Wait. I just thought of a way. The 2nd baseman dives for the ball and gets it into his glove and the runner from first steps on the glove (notice that we still have to assume general klutziness on SOMEBODY'S part here). That would work -- the 2nd baseman would have to complete the play to first to end the inning, although the umpires might rule interference and disallow the run anyway. Certainly the manager of the fielding team would be screaming.
OK, you get a cigar. A short one (g!).
FReegards!
Your answer is marvelous and I will remember it for use when talking baseball trivia. It is also highly unlikely. If it were not unlikely, then quite a few baseball fans would know the answer to the question because we would see it regularly. That's what makes your question such a great one: it combines a rare fact situation with a rule known by few. It always amazes me that so many situations are covered by the rules even though you'll never, or hardly ever, see them. Just as it amazes me that somebody figured out that 90 feet was the correct distance between bases, or 60 feet, six inches, from the rubber to the plate. Move bases in five feet and batting averages would go up 30 points. Move the mound in five feet and nobody, repeat -- nobody --, could have hit Bob Gibson (that, and we might have a list of several pitchers killed by line drives).
The fact that your question is such a great trivia question is due, in large part, to the fact that it is so unlikely.
Your original post only asked for a way that a team was required to record four outs or suffer the consequences. I described a situation that's covered by the rules.
Is my scenario unlikely? Yes. One of the reasons it's unlikely is that several things must occur in a precise order, and some of those things are very unlikely. It's like an unassisted triple play -- luck, combined with some unlikely events. Believe Micky Morandini (didn't look up the spelling; just know he was with the Phillies) recorded the last UTP from second. Know that Dr. Srangeglove was the last one before that, from third base, in 1968, with the Pirates. In both cases, the hit-and-run was on.
Both Morandini and Dick Stuart TAGGED a runner for the third out -- a runner who had left his base (first, for Morandini, and second, for Stuart) before the line drive was hit and caught. Both Morandini and Stuart COULD have thrown the ball back to the base behind the runner (back to first for Morandini, back to second for Stuart). The runner would have been out. They didn't make the throw because the runner was right there (and fell down trying to make it back to second, in the case of Stuart's UTP, if I remember correctly) and tagging was easy, with no chance of an errant throw or misplayed ball. "General klutziness," as you correctly called it, happens in baseball, like a runner falling down; it just happens infinitely less in MLB than it does at a family reunion softball game. Lonnie Smith (on a delayed steal) not being able to see the ball against the Homer Hankies in the Braves/Twins World Series (and inexplicably not looking to the third base coach for direction as to whether he should run to third). The Ed Armbruster play in an early 1970's World Series between the Reds and the Orioles, when the catcher held the ball cocked back in his throwing hand and tagged the runner "out" at home with an empty glove (and getting away with it). General klutziness happens -- MLB lore is littered with heavy-hitting outfielders for whom every fly ball was an adventure.
Almost any infielder will tag a runner (or run over and step on a base), if that play's quickly available, rather than throwing. It's certainly what they're taught from T-ball through high school and American Legion and up to The Show. Tagging (or touching the base) doesn't risk the errant throw, the misplayed catch (or Reggie Jackson throwing out his hip to block the throw, as he did in a World Series game, the jerk).
My scenario is unlikely, but it's not impossible and it's not absurd. If the second baseman has an immediate chance to tag the runner from first to second, and it's a bang-bang play with the runner from third reaching home, he'll likely tag the runner and try to beat the play at home. Then he'll throw the ball to first. If he doesn't tag the runner and instead throws the ball away (imagine Chuck Knoblach double-clutching at the end of his career, when he couldn't throw to first, or those Sports Center moments when somebody with a multi-million dollar contract, for no reason, just throws the ball away), he'll get his rear end chewed out by the manager. During the last thirty or so games Chuck Knoblach played second, he would have done ANYTHING to avoid throwing the ball to first.
What's great about baseball -- and different than football and basketball for some reason -- is that everything will happen that can, eventually (except, perhaps, for the Cubs winning the World Series). That's why there are such great baseball trivia questions with answers involving unusual fact situations and rules that are rarely called into play -- like yours -- or just unlikely facts -- like mine.
You only asked for a way, within the rules, for a team to be required to post the fourth out to avoid adverse consequences. I came up with one that just happens to be different from yours.
I think your question and answer were great, but there is more than one answer to the question. Your scenario is far more elegant than mine. Yours brings into play a wonderfully unknown rule that will break the brain of those guys who are convinced they know all the rules (I certainly don't).
But if we're playing within the rules (in answering a question about playing within the rules), my answer, however unlikely, can happen and would result, within the rules, in the fielding team having to post a fourth out to avoid adverse consequences.
Your scenario has never occurred to my knowledge. I'm not criming you at all -- I said right off it was a clever thought -- and perhaps some day your scenario will occur.
But if the 3rd out in an inning is ANY sort of forceout, it matters not whether the runner on 3rd crosses the plate before the force is made.
If it bounces in a he drops it, it would be a wild pitch error E-1. If it's a drop third strike, then E-2 (catcher)
If the ball bounces before it crosses the plate and the catcher catches it, it is an out, and no additional put out is needed. But any catcher not tagging the runner would be stupid.
Did you see the opening of the game last night? I heard that the umpire in left field had guards. How was he received?
But he's on ESPN too. Those guys on ESPN Chicago were talking yesterday how baseball MUST have instant replay. Can you imagine? The game is slow now and adding that would make it even slower. Instant replay would not have reversed that call at the plate on Tuesday night.
If there is any doubt on the call, the catcher should tag the runner. I have seen it done 100 times by catchers on balls anywhere close to the dirt, and that one was close. I am not huge fan of the drop third strike rule anyways. If anything, this illustrates what a poor rule it is.
I might have one real way it could happen. Say there are one out, bases loaded. A fly ball is it to the outfield. They get the guy out at third in a pickel as he tried to tag up, but they rule the runner scored first. They then appeal that the guy on first left too soon and win the appeal, which I think would disallow the run, although I am not certain on that.
You are right -- that's another way, within the rules, I hadn't thought of.
Do you agree with SAJ that my scenario is so strange it would never happen?
Pared down to its essentials, under both our answers, the third out is a tagged runner, not a force-out, and the run scores before the tag out. The fielding team is FORCED to get a fourth out (although it's not REALLY a fourth out, as explained below) - a force out, to prevent the adverse consequences. That was the only requirement of SAJ's question. Stated that way, both your answer and my answer become the same answer, and they are both right -- and there are probably a dozen other scenarios that the baseball intelligensia could come up with in a day.
I gave a single scenario, as did you, instead of sticking to the generic answer. That was probably our major mistake in SAJ's eyes.
My answer could happen several ways. As to the comment about "general klutziness" and infielders not doing something stupid like tagging a runner first and then going to first? People make bone-headed plays with regularity. Who was the player this year who thought the out at first was number three, rolled the ball to the mound (or maybe he flipped it into the stands on his way to the dugout, as I think about it), only to have the runner on third score because the play at first was only out number two? Saw it on Sports Center. And let's not forget Marv Throneberry started at first for the '62 Mets. Boneheaded and a terrible fielder. Not all MLB players are Nobel Laureates, even on the subject of baseball. Baseball players are known as being the most poorly-educated of MLB, NFL, and NBA players. A far lower percentage go to college than the other two sports (although I got to see Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, and Will Clark play in College World Series regional games, and they were outstanding even then), and the number of Caribbean players who have become professional minor leaguers, then major leaguers, and never finish high school far outpaces the number of players in the NFL and NBA who never finished high school.
The comment that a runner could never be tagged out and there be enough time to still throw the batter out at first? Jeez, just assume the batter is Gary Sheffield in a bad mood or, worse, Bobby Bonilla in his later years when he wanted to be traded. I saw Bonilla thrown out at first on clean singles to right field on more than one occasion because of his loafing. Anyone who watched Bonilla did. Hank Aaron (I'm sorry to say this, for those who worship Aaron over Mays, but in his last few years Aaron was a home run hitter and a liability everywhere else -- take it from someone who lived in Atlanta at the time) routinely jogged to first on a grounder he thought would be the third out -- at a pace that made you think he was using a walker. He sometimes stopped half-way and jogged to the dugout (which would be the third out and would render this discussion moot).
I've seen a second baseman, fielding a relatively slow grounder, tag the man coming from first to second instead of throwing to first or second before the tag, on many occasions. If the runner is there, you tag him. No questions asked. It's a sure out, it may beat the play at the plate (rendering the rest of the scenario moot), it doesn't always present a significant risk of not being able to get the runner at first as SAJ believes (just assume the batter was Boog Powell or one of baseball's many catchers of the 1960's and 1970's whose speed to first could "be timed with a sundial.")
If you are an infielder with an immediately available tag that may beat the run at home, you make the tag. You DON'T throw the ball to second or first instead, before making the tag. To do so is to give up a sure out that make close out the inning, and in turn to risk a ball thrown away. There are countless, countless ways that each of elements of my answer can happen -- some extremely unlikely, some unlikely, but when you consider the universe of possible unlikely events, the likelihood of ONE happening increases if you measuring collectively likelihood before the play; it's basic statistics).
Too bad the stats aren't kept by Bill James on this one, but I'd wager good money it's happened many times.
Let's also point out that the original question did not require (a) MLB players, (b) who think immediately of the consequences of their actions (or who are even aware of the number of outs -- somebody screws up several times a year on that in MLB), (c) lack of sufficient likelihood in the eyes of SAJJ, (d) no "general klutziness", (e) no "brain farts", and (f) no slow runners to first. Those are most of the points brought out to refute my possible scenario. As for the "interference" call, if the fielder fields the ball, even in a direct path between first and second, and does not impede the runner by requiring him to slow down, stop, or swerve to avoid hitting the fielder, there's no interference call. A timely hit grounder results in an infielder fielding a ball, having an immediate opportunity to tag a runner, with no interference, and virtually no elapsed time denying a play at first.
SAJ's question should have been phrased:
"Can you think of a scenario where MLB players and not any other type of baseball players playing within the rules of baseball, except perhaps for high-level minor leaquers with the talent and savvy to make it to The Show in a relatively short time, playing in the complete absence of general klutziness, "brain farts," and not thinking they might beat a bang-bang play, having enough knowledge of unusual situations to immediately know exactly what to do in each situation unlike some material percentage of players, in cases where the batter is an average or above-average runner in speed, and nobody slips or trips, and the men on base did not mistake the signals given by the third base coach, and the men on base are not moving with the pitch on a 3-2 count with two outs, or running on a hit-and-run, and the elements of the play, although they each occur with some regularity, are as unlikely to occur in sequence as the events that lead to the rare unassisted triple play, and you cannot apply statistical methodology which shows that the advance prediction of the possibility of any single unlikely event that makes up a list of different unlikely events is equal to the of the individual possibilities of those events, with unlikeness in all cases to be subjectively judged by the asker or the question in order to maintain the integrity of my trivia question that I've always treasured because I thought there was only one answer and having a second or third answer destroys some of the value of my prized trivia question, must register a fourth out in an inning to prevent adverse consequences?
That appears to have been the question intended, if not directly asked. In that case, my answer is -- well, it possibly only happens in the case of SAJ's scenario, because Always Right's and Scoutmaster's answers, although technically correct and within the rules, don't meet the necessary standard of likelihood, lack of klutziness, etc., employed by SAJ.
SAJ, however, has a Sophie's choice. Either he admits his series of events is rare enough that it, too, is unlikely -- which defeats the main part of his defense against your answer and mine, or he admits his series of events occurs with enough frequency (as he now states) that the defensive players should know what is going on and what is required (paticularly since his scenario requires that ALL NINE defensive players not know the rules and cross the foul lines), which means that a collective "brain fart" on behalf of ALL NINE players, as well as the manager, bench coach, pitching coach and all players on the bench, who have sufficient time to leap to the top steps of the dugout, not crossing into the field of play, and yell to the center fielder (or the right fielder, in the case of running to the visitor's dugout, or the left fielder, in the case of running to the home team's dugout) not to cross the foul line, must occur for his scenario to play out.
It's surprising how many people can't answer the question "name the seven ways a batter can reach first base safely." Why does it destroy SAJ's question to phrase it "name the two ways a defensive team is required to record four outs in an inning to prevent suffering adverse consequences" and using the generic answer above along with his?
The other problem with SAJ's answer is that I sincerely doubt that a scorekeeper would register FOUR outs for the inning. I'll have to look that up. What he really means is "name the situation in which a defensive team must successively complete an appeal that a runner left a base too early after already recording the third out to prevent the adverse consequences of NOT completing the successful appeal." That's the question, because the scorebook is not going to show four outs in the inning. The successful appeal at third is NOT a fourth out, but a technicality that must be met so as not to suffer the consequences of not completing it.
That's also the case with our answers. There is no fourth out. There is only (a) a successful appeal, after the third out has been recorded, that the runner left third too early, or (b) a successful force out of a player, after the third out has been recorded, required in either case to prevent the adverse consequences of not completing acts (a) or (b). THERE IS NO FOURTH "OUT" RECORDED IN ANY CASE.
I apologize for any typos or errors in grammar. In a hurry and typing stream of consciousness.
A third permutation which uses part of SAJ's scenario and part of ours. One out, bases loaded, flyout, and runners on both second and third correctly time the jump to tag up). Runner on third, being faster or getting better jump, scores before the runner from second reaches third. Man coming from second is safe when tagging up but overslides the bag (or gets pulled off the bag like Kent Hrbek pulled Ron Gant off the bag at first in the Twins/Braves World Series) and must be TAGGED OUT for the third out.
Man on first tried to tag up to go to second (unlikely on a ball to the outfield, unless he saw the throw to third and didn't bother to go back and touch first to tag up), but leaves too early or without going back to tag first (second possibility is unlikely).
Appeal must be made at first before players cross foul lines or run scores.
Similar to SAJ's scenario but different -- requires tag out at third and not just a force out for the third out, followed by appeal at a base.
There is more than one answer to SAJ's question.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.