A's Lose Run on Odd Retired Runner's Interference

Oakland lost a run in Anaheim as HP Umpire John Bacon declared A's baserunner Kyle McCann out at home after he missed home plate and was physically assisted by Athletics just-scored runner Armando Alvarez in returning to touch the missed base before the Angels had the opportunity to appeal. Was this the correct call?

Although Official Baseball Rule 6.01(a)(8) puts a runner out when "the base coach at third base, or first base, by touching or holding the runner, physically assists them in returning to or leaving third base or first base," Alvarez, who scored seconds earlier, is not a coach and the base assistance came at home plate, not first or third base.

OBR 6.01(a)(5) pertaining to recently-retired runner's interference states, "It is interference by a batter or a runner when any batter or runner who has just been put out, or any runner who has just scored, hinders or impedes any following play being made on a runner. Such runner shall be declared out for the interference of their teammate."

But with Angels pitcher Roansy Contreras appearing oblivious to McCann's initial missed base touch at home, was the home team even planning to appeal the play? Does it even matter?

According to a Wendelstedt Manual interpretation, no it does not: "A runner is out...when a member of the offensive team, other than a another runner running the bases, physically assists..."

Because just-scored Alvarez was not a "runner running the bases" at the time of the physical assistance, this is considered interference by a retired/scored runner, which puts McCann out for Oakland depriving the Angels of the free choice of a potential appeal on the missed base touch.

Video as follows:

Rays Lose Replay Review Challenge of Guardians HR Base Touch

Rays manager Kevin Cash filed an unsuccessful challenge during Game 1 of Tampa Bay's AL Wild Card Series against Cleveland, alleging that Guardians baserunner Amed Rosario failed to touch second base during teammate Jose Ramirez's home run in the 6th inning. Replay Review upheld 2B Umpire Quinn Wolcott's safe (legal touch) call.

Believe or not, there are a handful of relevant rules for this play.

Official Baseball Rule 5.06(b)(1) obligates runners to touch bases: "In advancing, a runner shall touch first, second, third and home base in order."

OBR 5.09(c)(2) authorizes defensive appeals for a runner's failure to touch their bases: "Any runner shall be called out on appeal when, with the ball in play, while advancing or returning to a base, they fail to touch each base in order before they, or a missed base, is tagged."

And OBR 5.06(b)(4) clarifies that even though OBR 5.09(c)(2) refers to "with the ball in play," bases awarded still must be touched: "The fact a runner is awarded a base or bases without liability to be put out does not relieve them of the responsibility to touch the base they are awarded and all intervening bases."

We also review the MLB Umpire Manual interpretation for past/prior as well as last time by: "If the runner retouches first and then second in advancing to the awarded base, the runner’s failure to touch second base in returning to first is “corrected” under the theory that touching the base the “last time by” corrects any previous error."

Video as follows:

Ask - Washington Loses Run on Miami's Chaser Appeal

Already 43 games behind first place in the NL East, the Washington Nationals lost an apparent run in Miami after Marlins catcher Nick Fortes successfully appealed to HP Umpire Bill Miller that Nats baserunner CJ Abrams failed to touch home plate, a call affirmed via Replay Review.

With none out and two on (R1 Vargas, R3 Abrams) in the 2nd inning of Sunday's affair in Miami, Nationals batter Victor Robles hit a ground ball to Marlins pitcher Edward Cabrera, who threw home to catcher Fortes as runner R3 Abrams slid toward home plate. HP Umpire Miller made no signal, only ruling R3 Abrams out after catcher Fortes pursued Abrams to the visitor's first-base dugout at Marlins Park to apply a tag.

The Appeal Rule: Pursuant to Official Baseball Rule 5.09(c)(2), a runner is out on appeal when "they fail to touch each base in order before they, or a missed base, are tagged."

Furthermore, the MLB Umpire Manual advises what to do when both the runner misses their base touch and the fielder misses their tag of the runner, as Miller ruled occurred in Miami: "the umpire shall make no signal on the play...the runner must then be tagged if they attempt to return to the plate; if they continue on their way to the bench, the defense may make an appeal."

If the runner returns to the plate before being tagged, the umpire may then signal the runner safe.

If the runner makes no attempt to return to the plate, as occurred in Miami, the catcher has two options to appeal. For this play, F2 Fortes could have either tagged home plate or tagged the runner Abrams; so-called "accidental" appeals wherein the fielder inadvertently steps on the base with the ball don't count, meaning that Fortes would have to make it clear to HP Umpire Miller that stepping on the base was an intentional act alleging that runner Abrams failed to legally touch it—pursuing the runner to the warning track in front of their dugout in order to apply a tag, while time-consuming, is also a valid appeal option, meaning that Miller properly ruled on Fortes' appeal, declaring runner Abrams out for failing to touch a base. 

Video as follows:

Quickie - A Pocket Full of Nothing and the Hanging Tag

When Replay Review overturned a close play at the plate from safe-to-out, HQ's umpire relied on the slimmest of margin's—catcher Salvador Perez's tag of runner Tony Kemp's hanging pocket—to rule an out.

For this particular play, HP Umpire Alex MacKay works the wedge, staying on the catcher's foul-facing hip to see Perez's tag attempt, initially calling baserunner Kemp safe.

However, Replay upon review determined that Perez's mitt tagged the lining of Kemp's back pocket, which was turned inside out as he ran the bases.

To do so, Replay relied on the definitions of TAG and TOUCH which specify that a tag shall be considered legal if any part of the uniform is touched by the fielder's glove (not including its laces). Furthermore, Official Baseball Rule 5.05(b)(2) states a touch has not occurred if the ball (or, in this case, glove/mitt) "only touches any jewelry being worn by a player," similar in vein to the TAG definition stating "not including hanging laces alone" and "For purposes of this definition any jewelry being worn by a player (e.g., necklaces, bracelets, etc.) shall not constitute a part of the player’s body."

Finally, TOUCH is defined as follows: "To touch a player or umpire is to touch any part of their body, or any uniform or equipment worn by them (but not any jewelry (e.g., necklaces, bracelets, etc.) worn by a player)."

Video as follows: