How to score

I think this question would be better in the scorekeepers section rather than the umpires.  That being said, I would score it a double.  I'm pretty sure you can't have a stolen base until there is another play.  You can't consider a mental lapse as an error, so a double would be my score.  Maybe I'm wrong and there may be others with different answers, but that's my vote.

Not a scorig expert but my GUESS would be:

The result of the play was a single, the fact that no one was covering 2B, would seem to be Defensive Indifference....so I would score a Single with Defensive Indifference to 2B.

I don't think Defensive Indifference applies here.  That applies to when a defense allows a runner to take a base that otherwise would have been a stolen base.  I think it was a mental lapse on the part of the defense that they didn't have anyone covering 2nd.  I really don't see any way around it being a double.

I can see the argument for it being a double and probably would be but is the best example of just because it's looks weird doesn't mean it's wrong.  I think the other possible solution would be charging an error to a MIF but not real sure.

Originally Posted by im647f:

Runner on 2nd, batter lays bunt down third. Runner on 2nd advances plus the batter beats the throw to 1st. After being called safe at 1st the batter realizes nobody is covering 2nd and advances. How is the advancement to second scored? One dad said stolen base, other said it's scored a double. We have no clue!

Problem is, without seeing everything going on, its really difficult to say. Almost always when that kind of thing happens, its because one of the defenders blew an assignment, or because the defenders were busy trying to make a play somewhere else.

The language is pretty clear though that since there were no errors involved, its either a double or a fielder’s choice. See 10.06(b).

10.06 DETERMINING VALUE OF BASE HITS

(b) When, with one or more runners on base, the batter advances more than one base on a safe hit and the defensive team makes an attempt to put out a preceding runner, the scorer shall determine whether the batter made a legitimate two-base hit or three-base hit, or whether the batter-runner advanced beyond first base on the fielder’s choice.

Now if the batter/runner hit 1^st and kept on running, chances are I’d give him a double. But, if there were virtually anything going on with the runner on 3^rd, chances are I’d score it a bunt single with him going to 2^nd on a FC.

As I said, without seeing it, its really impossible to tell, other than it would never be a stolen base, and indifference only pertains to a stolen base.

Thanks for posting the rule Stats.  You are right, it's always best if you are there to see the play.  In this case, the OP states that the play was to 1st and doesn't mention any play on the runner at home.  Since the runner was safe at 1st, it's definitely a hit, no one covering 2nd is a mental lapse and can't be considered an error.  Still have to go with double.  Unless the OP forgot to mention that the 1B threw home after the play to 1st and the runner went to second on that throw, then FC.  But I don't see that.  If it's exactly like OP says, bunt double.  Weird, but true. 

Prolly the most misunderstood thing about scoring is, a lot of it has to do with what the scorer sees, not necessarily what anyone else watching sees.

I’ve said for many years that the game I see as an SK is not the same game most others see. Its not that we all don’t see the same game, its that we’re looking for different things, and often from different vantage points.

On the play described by the OP, chances are if I was scoring I’d have been pretty much behind the PU and just to his right. I don’t know where the OP was, but if he was near the 3^rd base dugout, he’d have seen different things than if he was near the 1^st base dugout, and certainly have seen something different than me. So it could be that he didn’t notice that something was going on with the lead runner, or that the batter-runner never really stopped. Both would produce a different result.

These things are all very subjective, and that’s what makes them fun to talk about and very difficult to discuss after the fact.

Definitely not trying to get in an argument, just trying to get your perspective as a SK.  I can see how something going on with the lead runner could cause a certain result.  I'm thinking a FC for the batter if a play was made towards him.  However, not sure what effect the batter continuing to run, or stopping, then running would have on the outcome.

If the runner never stopped and no play made on the runner on 3rd, I hear you saying double.  Let's say the batter reaches 1st, stops, turns around, then sees that no one is covering 2nd and takes off in a foot race with the 1st baseman chasing him.  I think I would still have double.  How would you score these differently?  Just curious what you're thinking.

That's exactly what happened, except it was 2nd baseman chasing the batter down the base line. It was a clean field and throw by 3rd but batter clearly beat it out. Batter stops, turns and takes off for 2nd with 2nd baseman following. 1st & 3rd were in for the bunt and SS was covering 3rd.  

bballman,

As with all things like this, I can’t express enough that it depends on much more than one or two things. In the narrow example you give, both would be a double. But, let’s change it a little. The batter barely beats out the bunt on a throw from F5 to F4 coving 1^st because he forgot he was responsible for covering 2^nd.  F6 has gone to cover 3^rd vacated by the F5 to make the play, and 2^nd is left open. After making the catch on the PO attempt, F4 realizes the original runner has rounded 3^rd a bit too far and simply moves toward 3^rd to make sure he doesn’t continue. Batter takes off for 2^nd and reaches safely.

Chances are, if I see any move to keep the lead runner where he is, the double is off the table. Think of how many times something similar happens when the ball is hit to the outfield and the batter takes 2^nd on a throw that’s nowhere near the lead runner.

Of course its all hypothetical, but having that lead runner, especially at 3^rd, causes all kinds of other things to come into play. Now had there been no one on and the batter beat out a bunt or another IF hit and for some reason 2^nd opened up and the batter got there and there wasn’t an error, chances are it’d be a double every time because there’s no other choice for the defense to make but to get the runner.

We could all go crazy finding exceptions to “normal” plays, but they’d be so rare there’d be no point. Lots of weird things happen, but ya gotta go with what the scorer sees because no one else has his/her perspective. If the scorer can be shown s/he’d missed something, all that has to happen is to turn the pencil over and use the eraser. This is exactly why coaches shouldn’t have players in the dugout scoring games, or having parents who like to “socialize” scoring. There just are times when it takes a lot of concentration to see what happened.

A single, with a stolen base to second.

I've got a single and fielder's choice for advance to second. This is pretty much the 'catch all' for people advancing with nothing else going on and no errors or miss-plays.

  The runner definitely hit a single, not a double, and yes, if the P or SS would have ran and covered second base real quick and he was thrown out at second, he would have been charged with a caught stealing.

    Mental error by someone caused the vacant base so I don't like the fielders indifference, only because there was no fielder to throw to, leaving no chance for the second baseman,  but due to the fact that there was a runner on third that could possibly advance on the throw to second, you have to assume there's a chance he wouldn't throw even if someone was covering the base,  so I would score a single w/a FC.  c) defensive indifference - undefended steal.

Nope. You can't be caught stealing when you weren't even a runner at the time of the pitch.

Let's start with what it can't be according to the definitions of each possibility and see what's left:

It's not a double because you don't get credit for extra base hits unless your hit is the sole reason for advancing as far as you got.

It's not a stolen base because a stolen base can't be aided by other action.

It's not a fielder's choice unless there is an actual attempt to retire the preceding runner.

What does that leave?

An error.

On whom?

On the team.  Federation rule 9-5-5 says, "An error is charged against a fielder or a team for each misplay that . . . permits the runner to advance one or more bases."  

There is no definition that limits the meaning of "misplay" to physical handling of the ball.  The team made a misplay by not covering the base.  That misplay--not the hit, not the runner's unaided initiative to steal, not the choice of a defender to make a play on another runner--is the sole reason for the advance.  

I score it a team error. 

2-14-1 doesn't require a play on another runner. It does say indifference is a fielder's choice. The only question is whether the example they use (an undefended steal) is intended to be all-inclusive or simply illustrative.

Swampboy,

This is a great demonstration of why I use OBR rather than FED for most scoring questions.

OBR specifically lays out what a “misplay” is, plus it speaks to the question of “mental mistakes”. While FED does rule the roost in HS ball, most would agree that it is far behind the times and lacking in explanation when compared to OBR or even NCAA rules, and you can’t find much in the casebook about scoring.

Most scorers I know will never score a team error because they can’t find a player to score the error to. In short, IMHO, if its an error, it needs to be charged to a specific player.

Stats, 

I also prefer OBR to Fed in some areas (for example, the writing is simply better).  However, we are obliged to score according to the rules under which the game is being played (which we do not know in this case, so interpretations under all rule sets are welcome), and it can make a difference.

For example, if you have a runner on first, the batter hits a grounder deep into the 5-6 hole, the shortstop ranges to his right, fields the ball cleanly, realizes he has no hope of getting the batter-runner at first, and makes a late throw to attempt to get a force at second, you get two different scoring results depending on where the game is being played.  Federation rules say to award a hit if the scorekeeper judges the fielder could not have retired the batter-runner at first.  OBR awards a FC as long as an infielder fields the ball cleanly and makes an attempt at another runner, regardless of whether the attempt is successful and regardless of whether the fielder could have got the batter-runner at first.

You need to score and play under the same set of rules.

Matt, 

I thought the OP's amplifying information about a fielder chasing the batter-runner to second base made it obvious that it wasn't indifference.  

I didn't catch that part, but it does help--let's set up a parallel example.

Let's say we have the same situation in the OP with BR reaching 1B, but let's say they throw behind him, he panics and gets in a rundown, and with no errors, manages to advance to 2B. How would that be scored?

In Fed, I'd guess stolen base.  The NFHS definition of runner specifically encompasses batter-runner, and it is an advance not aided by a hit, error, or fielders choice.  

Also, it is similar to what happens when a runner starts on first movement, they throw behind him and he ends up at second--either with or without a run down.  Runner gets a SB in that situation.

Situations like this are why we need another scoring category:

SUGL:  Screwed Up; Got Lucky.

That's one of the things that surprised me, that FED doesn't have a requirement that a stolen base be achieved by a non-BR. Being an umpire, I don't care about OBR 10 or FED 9 and have never dug into them, and I care about scorers only so far as them opening and closing their mouths at the appropriate times. So, I came here out of ignorance.

Hell, the only reason I clicked on this post was the title "How to score." I was hoping to better my luck.

Sorry, no particular expertise to offer on that. 

Swampboy,

Maybe I’m missing something in OBR. Where do you see it saying as long as an attempt to get another runner the batter can’t be credited with a base hit? Here’s why I ask. To me there’s a hierarchy in the rules so that certain things must be resolved before others take effect, and IMHO a base hit is one of those things.

Here’s one of the criteria OBR has for a hit.  To me, it gives the scorer the latitude to make the determination, and then tells him in no uncertain terms to give the benefit of the doubt to the batter. That’s regardless whether there’s something else going on with the play that might make it a FC. So, if I see a play where I don’t think the batter could have been put out, he’s getting a hit. I realize not everyone looks at the rules the same way, but that’s how I was taught, so that’s how I do it.

10.05 BASE HITS

A base hit is a statistic credited to a batter when such batter reaches base safely, as set forth in this Rule 10.05.

(a) The official scorer shall credit a batter with a base hit when:

(2) the batter reaches first base safely on a fair ball hit with such force, or so slowly, that any fielder attempting to make a play with the ball has no opportunity to do so;

Rule 10.05(a) Comment: In applying Rule 10.05(a), the official scorer shall always give the batter the benefit of the doubt. A safe course for the official scorer to follow is to score a hit when exceptionally good fielding of a ball fails to result in a putout.

Stats, 

It was a combination of the definition of fielder's choice in rule 2 and an explanation I received of how it gets applied.

Originally Posted by Swampboy:

Stats, 

It was a combination of the definition of fielder's choice in rule 2 and an explanation I received of how it gets applied.

Trust me, I get it. Unlike umpires who have to take test after test and need to remain current, or coaches who have to meet certain requirements about how they go about doing their job, or players who have to try out for their position on the team, scorers are out there flopping around in the dark like a carp in a rowboat. As far as I know, there aren’t any casebooks that apply to scorers, no tests to check them out, and no schools to teach them.

The scorer depends on the coach who hires them, the person they replaced, or some conglomeration of helpful assistance from well-meaning people to teach them how to keep score. Unfortunately, more often than not, the help they get is less than adequate, so they have to learn the old fashioned way. By on-the-job training. IOW, it takes a lot of experience to be a good scorer, and even more to become a good statistician.

It takes years of experience for a coach to become a VHC in a HS program, and around here it takes years for an umpire to become qualified to umpire HSV games. But it’s possible to have a scorer who’s never scored a game, let alone at the HSV level. Then, just about the time they get proficient, they’re gone! So, without any standards other than personal ones, its entirely possible your interpretation is correct and mine’s full of beans. I wish it weren’t so, but the only way I can see that would change is when scorers get paid just like umpires. Sadly though, I don’t foresee the time when scorers would get paid, so there’s really no incentive to spend the time necessary to become proficient.