Here's a play that happened to us this weekend. Second and third, one out. Ball hit to centerfielder, who makes the catch and then throws home to try to get the runner on third who tagged. Runner is safe.
A coach notices that the runner on SECOND never tagged up. She left the base, watched the catch, and then kept running.
So we have our catcher throw the ball to second. Runner is called out.
However, that out occurs AFTER the runner on third has scored.
Our contention is, play at second is a force-out. Can't score a run when there is a force out on the field for the third out.
Umps, and eventually umpire director, huddle and eventually tell us that is only the case in what they called a "continuation" force out, ie, a batter going to first; a runner on second having to move to second, etc.
Since the umpire had to make a judgement on the runner on second (even though it was obvious, and even though we it wasn't a tag play for the out but a "force out" on the return to the base), then the runner on third was allowed to score if they beat the third out.
Was the call right? I'd never seen that one before : >
A coach notices that the runner on SECOND never tagged up. She left the base, watched the catch, and then kept running.
So we have our catcher throw the ball to second. Runner is called out.
However, that out occurs AFTER the runner on third has scored.
Our contention is, play at second is a force-out. Can't score a run when there is a force out on the field for the third out.
Umps, and eventually umpire director, huddle and eventually tell us that is only the case in what they called a "continuation" force out, ie, a batter going to first; a runner on second having to move to second, etc.
Since the umpire had to make a judgement on the runner on second (even though it was obvious, and even though we it wasn't a tag play for the out but a "force out" on the return to the base), then the runner on third was allowed to score if they beat the third out.
Was the call right? I'd never seen that one before : >