Baseline Question

You cant call him out for this......

You had your first encounter with the play called "skunk in the outfield". It is perfectly legal.

The base runner establishes the baseline and it then must be direct from that point to the next base..

The play has been around for years, but lately it seems to have a resurgence in popularity and it catches a number of young umpires....

NFHS rule 8-4-2a- when a play is being made on a runner, he establishes his base path as a direct line between his position and his base

Authoritative opinion is from Evans and the BRD>

"The base runner creates his own base path and this is what shall establish the direct line which he must comply with. The direct line is a line which originates from the runners starting point and progresses directly to the base. Do not consider the line connecting the centers of the bases as the direct line unless the runner is originating from the base"

Ok, I understand, but I made the call when he was retracing his exact path back to where he started. At this point doesn't he have to make an attempt toward 1B? He was heading back for the outer lip of the infield and not heading for the bag.

It's really hard to tell what the right call was in the situation you describe. If the second baseman has the ball and is running the runner back to first, in theory you draw a line from the runner to first base. The runner can be anywhere within 3 feet of that line. When a runner twists out of the way to avoid an imminent tag, it's pretty obvious. But when the fielder is still 10 - 15 feet away (and you're off at an angle) it's pretty hard to see if the runner is going back "towards" first base or has gone more than 3 feet out of a direct line back to the bag. The further he is away from the base, and the further the fielder is from him, the harder it is to make the call. I'd be hard pressed to defend that call in the circumstances you described unless the runner headed straight out into right field, and you made it almost impossible because you misunderstood the rule at the time.

quote:

he ... is still 10-15 feet back of the baseline (and making no attempt to get back within baseline). I'm giving the kid the benefit of the doubt at this point but screaming at him repeatedly to get back in the baseline....The kid maintains his 15 foot distance back of the baseline as he advances toward 1st despite my plea so I call him out before the 2B tags him and R3 doesn't even score.

If he had done what you were telling him to do - "get back in the baseline" - he would have been in violation of the rule. You booted the call. Live and learn.

Well, I'm glad I've been exposed to this rule and can decipher it in the future. Still, to me, I find it ludicrous that a runner could essentially establish his position in the outfield and force a game of "come tag me if you can."

The rules of baseball are amended as the time and custom permit, but on the whole they have a number of grey areas and even holes.......from time to time, coaches and players find ways to use these areas to advantage.....

So unless some authority eventually decides to close up those rules it remains legal.

Consider this variation:
Play: Runners on 1st and 3rd. Runner on first starts to walk directly toward 2nd base. (His intent is to get in a rundown so the runner at third can score) Pitcher throws the ball to the 2nd baseman and he starts toward the runner but is still 20-25 feet away from him. The runner from 3rd scores because the 2nd baseman ignored him. As the 2nd baseman continues after the runner the runner decides to run out into right field increasing the distance between him and the 2nd baseman to 30 or 40 feet. The runner has clearly violated the 3 foot rule but at 30 to 40 feet of separation no tag is imminent. When are you going to call this guy out?

This is the same as "Skunk in the Outfield" except it started with the runner in a different place. In the initial scenario submitted it was stated that the runner, from his starting place on the outer lip of the infield, began to move directly toward 2nd base. OK, he's still legal at this point. Until a play is being made on him he can go pretty much anywhere. When the pitcher threw the ball to the 2nd baseman and the runner began to retreat he was being played on and his only legal path, in retreat, is directly to 1st base. The moment he took more than one stride (3 feet) in a direction back toward where he originally started and not directly toward 1st base he was in violation of the rule and should be called out. The coach of the offensive team decided to run this play simply because there is no rule prohibiting where a runner can take a lead. Likewise there is no language in the NFHS rule book that states that a tag must be imminent for the out call to be made. It only states that the runner is out if he runs more than 3 feet away from a direct line between bases to avoid being tagged. By virtue of the fact that he was retreating from the 2nd baseman who was making a play on him and not in a direct line toward 1st base he is doing so to avoid being tagged and should be called out. The fact that the 2nd baseman wasn't close enough to physically tag him is irrelevant.

Pilsner, your theory is basically correct. The problem is to apply it in the real world. You are correct that the tag does not have to be "imminent" for the rule to come into play; it's just that it's usually hard to tell if the rule has been broken unless a tag is imminent. Your example, of a runner who turns and runs directly into the outfield, would be a case where it could be easily called. But it doesn't ever actually happen that way.
Picture this: if the line between first and second base runs east-west, then in the "Skunk in the outfield" play the runner, by positioning himself well north of the straight line between the bases, must run either in a southwesterly direction (toward second base) or southeasterly (toward first base) as soon as an attempt is made to tag him (imminent or not). Here's the problem: if he's going in a generally easterly or westerly direction, it's really hard to tell if he's got enough "southerly" going on to know if he's outside the "baseline" created between his position and the base. I mean, do the math: if he's midway between first and second, and fifteen feet back of a straight line between the bags, he can head nine feet due east or west before he's left the "baseline" Considering that no ump will be well positioned to guage the exact angle, unless he makes a sudden detour north or south it's gonna be really hard to make this call. The closer he is to either bag, and the more abrupt his departure from a direct line is, the easier it is to make the call.

P-Dog,
You're absolutely correct. My example was rather extreme. Was just trying to clear up the imminent tag thing.
You're also correct that no matter how hard we try, it is going to be difficult, if not impossible, to get into a good position to rule on the whether the runner is moving directly toward a bag.

I'll put my cards on the table.
I have a certain level of respect for myself as an umpire. I also have immense respect for the game of baseball. When a coach instructs his players to run this play he doing something that is not normal or customary to the game. (it only shows up every so many years) At the point in this play where things begin to break down, (i.e. a fielder with the ball is chasing a runner who is not "in my judgement" advancing toward a base) the play IMO is turning the game into a circus and I'm not going to give the clown (runner) any leeway. I'm going to call him out at the earliest possible oportunity.

Now, when the coach comes out to complain or argue I'm simply going to look him in the eye and say: "Coach, in my judgement, your runner ran more than 3 feet from a line from his position on the field and the base while trying avoid being tagged." He will have no grounds for protest. If he wishes to continue arguing, well, that's another matter and I'll deal with it.

This play (SITO), as listed in the original post, occurred in a high school game. I could be wrong but I'm guessing it was being played under NFHS rules. NFHS rules, despite being confusing at times with all the exceptions and notes, are written with heavy emphasis on Safety, Sportsmanship and Spirit of Fair Play. Should I assume (I know that's dangerous) that if the rules don't expressly prohibit something that it is Safe, Sportsmanlike and/or in the Spirit of Fair Play? No, I shouldn't and I won't. Indeed, there are two lists in the back of the NFHS rule book covering a Code of Ethics for Coaches and for Officials. Under Coaches: "The coach shall master the rules and shall teach them to his or her team. The coach SHALL NOT seek an advantage by circumvention of the SPIRIT or letter of the rules."
In my humble opinion the coach has sought that advantage just by attempting this play.
Also, Under Bench and Field Conduct:
NFHS Rule 3-3 Article 1 ...A coach, player, attendant or other bench personnel shall not: g. commit any unsportsmanlike act to include, but not limited to,: 4. behavior in any manner not in accordance with the spirt of fair play. Penalty: Warning and/or Ejection.
Now, I understand that what I've written here all revolves around my personal philosophy regarding officiating and baseball. In no way, shape or form is it intended to tell anyone how they should think or feel. (or deal with SITO) Just wanted to let you know what drives my thinking when I put on the uniform and walk onto the field.
Since the rules writers haven't yet chosen to deal with this in writing, we are left to deal with with judgement and interpretation.

Pilsner--I've never been forced to deal with this play, but I agree that it is an attempt to make a mockery of the game and I intend to handle similar to the way you described, thanks for your well thought-out response.

Here is a way that the coach of the defense can deal with the skunk play that I used as a coach of 12 year old majors:

The rules require that a pitcher pitch the ball within 20 seconds of receving it unless he is trying to make a play on a runner. Furthermore, the rules require that the ball be returned to the pitcher promptly after playing action ends. Finally, the rules allow a coach or catcher to request time to talk to the pitcher and forbid the umpire from granting time to said players until all playing action has ceased. (except to prevent harm to players) I used the combination of these rules to freeze the action.

I had the pitcher throw the ball to the second baseman who moved into the infield grass. The second baseman held the ball and did not move. Since a play is possible (on the skunk in the outfield), the second baseman did not have to return it to the pitcher. We had a Mexican standoff. My second baseman refused to move, the skunk was frozen in the outfield, and the runner on third could go nowhere. The umpire tried to force my player to return the ball to the pitcher. I protested the game (the umpire exceeded his authority in making my player return the ball to the pitcher while a play was still possible) and the umpire called time. That forced the skunk to return to first base (players have to return to the bag after time is called) and the other coach protested the game at that point because the umpires violated the rules.

I also had it in my back pocket to request time to visit my pitcher which I have a right to do before he is required to pitch. That would have forced an illegal calling of time by the umpire because there was still playing action on the field.

The whole mess went to a protest committee who promptly outlawed the skunk in the outfield play and gave umpires power to deal with it.