Hacker News Reader

Comment by tbenst | Hacker News Reader

Misleading reporting. The author truncated the actual MLB rule 7.08a, which reads in full:

    7.08 Any runner is out when—

    (a) (1) He runs more than three feet away from his base path to avoid being tagged
    unless his action is to avoid interference with a fielder fielding a batted ball. A
    runner’s base path is established when the tag attempt occurs and is a straight
    line from the runner to the base he is attempting to reach safely; or
    (2) after touching first base, he leaves the base path, obviously abandoning his
    effort to touch the next base;

By (2), the runner obviously abandoned his effort to touch the next base after touching first base and should have been ruled out.

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/downloads/y2012/Official_Baseball_Rul...

View on HN

Misleading comment.

7.08 (a) 2 specifically applies to the scenario like in this comment:

> Rule 7.08(a) Comment: Any runner after reaching first base who leaves the base path heading for his dugout or his position believing that there is no further play, may be declared out if the umpire judges the act of the runner to be considered abandoning his efforts to run the bases. Even though an out is called, the ball remains in play in regard to any other runner.

Essentially the runner has to obviously abandon his attempt to reach the next base. In the scenario outlined in the article the runner is still advancing to the next base, trying to draw a throw. According to your interpretation, any runner taking a lead without specifically advancing should be out, which is incorrect.

When it comes to judgement calls like this it all comes down to the umpire. Many umpires have noted[1] that this is a legal play. And it was ruled as such in the article's example. Calling it "misleading reporting" is a smear on a very well written story about an edge case that isn't clear cut.

(I will note that is very easy for the offense to execute incorrectly and for the umpires to get it wrong. For example: https://youtu.be/WnI4KlUNf38)

[1] http://www.austinumpires.org/skunkplay.html

I don't think the comment limits the meaning of abandonment, but rather gives an interpretation for a specific circumstance. Here's some umpires debating this rule: http://www.umpire.org/vb/showthread.php?s=2e5e11d3b28b94683f...

But, if you read the comments in the rules, it's not clear this play would constitute abandonment. Not clear it wouldn't either but you can find umpires on discussion boards who take the side that it's a legal play.

Where are these discussion boards in which umpires discuss esoteric baseball rules?

Not just/primarily umpires but, e.g. https://forum.officiating.com

closecallsports.com. While the site is heavy on umpire ejections there are many, highly-detailed discussions about interesting calls. Here's one about what is and isn't batter-runner interference http://www.closecallsports.com/2017/07/case-play-2017-8-batt...

But were they playing under MLB rules? A high school team?

Good point. There is a National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) and they have their own rules in general--though pretty much everyone uses MLB as a starting point for baseball. So (I'm guess their rules apply) you'd have to see if there were any differences relevant to base running in 2006.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com