Ball 4, check swing appeal

Why should the runner go back? Do you think a runner can't advance on a live ball?

Nope.  Stolen base.

I think we need to know more about what happened before we can answer.  In FED, if a decision is reversed and puts either team at a disadvantage, the umpires can try to make it right.

So, if the runner wasn't stealing, went to second only after the ball 4 count and the defense didn't play on him, then it's right to send him back.  Just like you wouldn't have the out call stand if he had been tagged out.

Now if he was stealing and you think he would have been safe anyway, keep him at second.

noumpere,

What else do you need to know? It doesn’t matter if the runner took off prior to the pitch or not. The count was 3-2 and the pitch didn’t hit the batter, wasn’t fouled, and there was no interference. The runner can walk, run, crawl, or do somersaults to the next base, and if he gets there before the defense tags him, there aren’t any do-overs.

A checked swing appeal is not what that is intended for.  A runner can advance at his risk any time the ball is live.  There is nothing an umpire can or should do to prevent that.

See case 10-2-3 H and I.

Now in these cases a runner was tagged and would have been out after the reversal but the out is taken off.  The rule about reversing a decision applies to both teams.

So if the only reason r1 went to second was because the umpire first called ball 4, then the runner should be put back at first.

The HS rule and the pro rule are different on this.

Apples and oranges. There was no umpire error in the OP. You can't fix something that's not broken.

I would like to agree, but the Casebook plays do "fix" situations where there was no umpire error.

10.2.3 SITUATION H: With a count of three balls and two strikes on B2 and R1
on first base, the batter takes what appears to be a half swing. The plate umpire
calls ball four and R1, upon hearing ball four, then trots to second base. The
catcher throws the ball to F4 who tags R1 before he reaches base. The catcher
asks the plate umpire to check with the base umpire to see if B2 did, in fact,
attempt to hit the pitch. The base umpire indicates that the batter did swing at the
ball. RULING: The plate umpire will declare the batter out and return R1 to first
base. The umpire-in-chief can rectify any situation in which an umpire’s decision
that was reversed has placed a base runner in jeopardy.

10.2.3 SITUATION I: With a count of three balls and two strikes on B1 and no
runners on base, the pitch is made and the batter takes what appears to be a half
swing. The plate umpire calls ball four as the ball gets away from F2. B1 trots to
first base and F2 throws the ball to F3, who tags B1 prior to his reaching the base.
F2 asks the plate umpire to check with the base umpire to see if it was a strike.
The base umpire indicates that B1 did swing at the ball. RULING: If, in the judg-
ment of the umpire-in-chief, B1 would have reached first base before the throw if
it had not been called ball four, the plate umpire can award B1 first base. The
umpire-in-chief can rectify any situation in which an umpire’s decision has placed
a batter-runner in jeopardy. Advances and outs made by runners following a
reversed call stand, if the call that was changed clearly did not place them in
jeopardy.

On the other hand, for umpire mistakes involving the infield fly rule, the players are all supposed to know the situation, and the results stand in FED.  

IMO, FED rules and casebook plays sometimes lack consistency. 

All these case plays refer to a runner in jeopardy. That is not the case in the OP.

I obviously agree.I stated several posts back that the ruling he was trying to apply was not applicable in this situation.