It’s surprising how frequently this issue comes up: Tie goes to the runner. I get emails through the web site, or I’m approached by people who know I’m an umpire, and the thing people want to vent about are the close plays at first base: the runner’s foot hits the bag and the ball hits the fielder’s glove in what appears to be the same instant. The umpire calls the runner out and all hell breaks loose.
Once upon a time, we all played by this rule. We played this rule in our youth, on school playgrounds and sandlots. It was the rule and it served us well. There were no umpires on the sandlots, and close plays at first base were (and remain) the cause of most disputes. So when consensus and arguments failed, the rule (that rule) helped settled the arguments. In those days, on those ball fields, ties went to the runner.
Not on the big field. Not in “real” baseball
Nope, ties do not go to the runner. Not on the big field. Not in “real” baseball. Not where there’s an umpire making the call. Rather, the prevailing interpretation is that the runner must beat the throw; if he doesn’t, he’s out. That’s the right call. And that’s where the arguments begin.
The discrepancy between the sandlot rule and the Big League rule is interesting, because to a certain extent, the discrepancy exists in a vacuum. The fact is, there is no rule in the Official Baseball Rules (OBR) that offers any guidance in cases where both events (runner’s foot touching the base, and the ball reaching the fielder’s glove), when they occur at exactly the same time. The prevailing (but still controversial) interpretation, that the runner must beat the throw, has but shadowy standing in the OBR. Part of the problem is that there’s no rule covering this situation; at the same time, however, there are rules, three of them, that surround the issue, and the three don’t fully agree. Therein lies one of the several shadowy seams whose ambiguous threads wind around the OBR like the stitching on a baseball.
There are three rules
The fact is, three rules apply, but none of them apply directly to the case of a tie, so you end up with a Bermuda Triangle of rules that surround the issue, and between them all is a foggy interpretation that relies more on tradition than rule.
Here are the three rules. I’ve trimmed them to their essentials (click the links for the full text):
| Rule 5.09(a)(10) [formerly 6.05(j)] |
A batter is out when … After a third strike or after he hits a fair ball, he or first base is tagged before he touches first base |
| Rule 5.09(b)(6) [formerly 7.08(e)] |
A runner is out when … He or the next base is tagged before he touches the next base |
| Rule 5.06(a)(1) [formerly 7.01] |
A runner acquires the right to an unoccupied base when he touches it before he is out |
It doesn’t take too close of a reading to see the contradiction. The first two [5.09(a) and 5.09(b)] make it quite clear that a runner is out if he or the base (when a force) are touched before the runner reaches the base. However, the third rule we cited [5.06(a)(1)] is equally clear that a runner is safe so long as he reaches a base before he or the base (when a force) are tagged.
What we have from the rules, then, is this: On one hand, the runner must beat the throw or tag to be safe, while on the other hand the defense must beat the runner to the bag to get the out. It appears that when the two events are simultaneous, the umpire should flip a coin to determine which of the rules to apply. The mind boggles.
In all of the OBR, the only mention of a tie is in connection with handling a tie score, for example, when a game is suspended. There is neither mention nor guidance of the case of simultaneous events (ties), and because of this, there exists a great black hole at the center of the baseball galaxy that we orbit, day after day, game after game, play after play, argument after argument.
There are no ties in baseball
As ingrained as tie-goes-to-the-runner is in sandlot and playground baseball, an equally time-honored expression among baseball insiders (and umpires in particular) is the axiom that there are no ties in baseball. The axiom was likely spawned, at least in part, by the black hole we’ve just discovered.
Clearly, though – if we’re honest with ourselves – it is not true that there are no ties. The fact is, there are ties on the base path not infrequently. Let’s stay with the play at first base for a moment. Among the many perfections of baseball, the length of the base path (90 feet) has proved an enduring testament to man’s ability (every now and then) to get things right. Legendary sports writer Red Smith said it well: “Ninety feet between home plate and first base may be the closest man has ever come to perfection.” What he means is, the balance between offense and defense is nearly perfectly balanced by those perfect 90 feet.
A batted ball to the infield will almost always produce an out if the defense plays the ball cleanly, without a bobble or an error. Add a bobble to the play and you probably have a close play (bang-bang), and even a small chance that a fast runner will beat the throw and be safe at first. (Ichiro did this in Seattle on a regular basis.) Misplay the ball more severely than a simple bobble, and the runner is safe close to half the time. Misplay the ball entirely and the runner is almost always safe.
The point is, the balance between the defense and the offense on a batted ball to the infield is nearly perfect, so much so that almost all plays at first base are relatively close, and a great many are so close they’re a challenge to call, as well as a good many very close plays (the bang-bang plays).
The upshot, then, is that this perfect balance between offense and defense leads necessarily to a large number of nearly simultaneous events, and some unknown number of truly simultaneous ones. Given all of the tens (maybe hundreds) of thousands of close plays at first base in a given baseball season, it’s only natural that some number of them result in dead-even ties. In other words, there are plenty of ties at first. And by the prevailing convention, these ties normally result in the runner being called out.
What we have, then, is an alternate axiom – one that’s not written, nor spoken, but exists nevertheless: Tie goes to the fielder.
Umpires weigh in
There are two authoritative sources of case law (if you will) and rules interpretations: Jaksa-Roder and Wendelstedt. All umpires with salt know both of these resources. Both are oft-used authorities for untangling thorny rules issues, of which there are no shortage in baseball. Let’s see what they have to say about this black hole.
Nothing. Nada. Niente. Nothing but silence.
Both discuss the rules (the three rules we’ve framed), but neither source addresses the issue of the simultaneous events, the tie at the base. Neither of these honored reference texts even has the word “tie” in their index.
Interestingly, on MLB.com, in a section entitled Ask the Umpire, veteran umpire Tim McClelland does address the issue in a Q-and-A. Here’s both question and answer.
I am an umpire for Little League. The coach told me that ties go to the runner. I said the batter has to beat the throw to first because there are no such thing as ties. Who is right?
– L.M.F.
McClelland: That is exactly right. There are no ties and there is no rule that says the tie goes to the runner. But the rule book does say that the runner must beat the ball to first base, and so if he doesn’t beat the ball, then he is out. So you have to make the decision. That’s why umpires are paid the money they are, to make the decision on if he did or if he didn’t. The only thing you can do is go by whether or not he beat the ball. If he did, then he is safe.
This is interesting, because McClelland is saying he’s going with 5.06(a)(1) and leaves it at that. His comments about “you have to make the decision” is really just a smokescreen to cover the ambiguity that’s he’s elected to ignore. But he’s in good company; this interpretation (that the runner must beat the throw) is the view that pervades, particularly in the Major Leagues. And umpiring conventions tend to filter down from there.
But that interpretation is not accepted universally. This subject comes up time and again on umpire chat rooms and discussion boards and the debates are intense and passionate. There’s McClelland’s view, that the runner must beat the throw. Then there’s the opposite view, which falls on 7.08(e), arguing that if the ball fails to reach the base before the runner touches it, the runner is safe. In other words, tie goes to the runner.
And then there are the umpires who (stupidly, in my view) try to have it both ways. They claim that on truly bang-bang plays at first they’ll judge by circumstances. If the defense was sloppy, they’ll call a runner safe. Same thing if a slow player shows extraordinary hustle. A runner who dogs it, on the other hand, is getting called out. This is the worst of all possible approaches to resolving the ambiguity.
Interestingly, a great many umpires assert that literal ties (true simultaneous events) are near impossible. One commentator claimed to have umpired for 50 years and in that span had never seen a tie on the bases. Our new world of super slow-mo and instant replay is slowly undermining this view. The fact is, ties happen.
Sadly, there’s no real conclusion to the story. Ties at first are a fact of life, and they’ll continue being called in a manner consistent with the umpire’s religion, so to speak. And it’s not really so big a problem as it may appear. It’s definitely not so big an issue as the variability in the strike zone. But don’t get me started on that can of worms.
To me its easy, Ties do go to the runner. The BALL has to be caught BEFORE the runner gets to the base per rule 7.08e. The 3 rules below only talk about the runner and before he touches it. If he touches at the same time, then rule 7.08e clearly STATES that the ball has to beat the runner. SO, if there is a TIE, the ball did not beat the runner, so he is SAFE.
Rule 5.09(a)(10)
[formerly 6.05(j)] A batter is out when … After a third strike or after he hits a fair ball, he or first base is tagged BEFORE he touches first base
Rule 5.09(b)(6)
[formerly 7.08(e)] A runner is out when … He or the next base is tagged BEFORE he TOUCHES the next base
Rule 5.06(a)(1)
[formerly 7.01] A runner acquires the right to an unoccupied base when he touches it BEFORE he is out
Just my opinion in trying to keep this simple.
Totally agree. It says the ball has to beat the runner. A tie does not beat the runner as it arrives at the same time. The person who wrote this article is misinterpreting simple English.
You are exactly right. It amazes me that the author does not see it. It clearly says that the runner is out if the ball gets there first. In a tie, it did not get there first, so the runner is safe. I dont understand why there is any confusion about this. And the Ump who says the rule says the opposite just goes to show how poorly the umps know the rules.
I’m surprised this has never been explicitly clarified in the rules. it should be.
The argumentative flaw in this is the notion of simultaneity – that two events can happen at the exact same moment in time. Einstein effectively dispelled this notion with Special Relativity. The problem is one of granularity of our ability to slice time down fine enough to discern which event happened when. So the pragmatic reality is, within the limitations of human perception – and now with ultra-slo-mo replays – there’s still question about which event happens first as we perceive and interpret it.
Interpretation plays an important aspect in this as well. Opposing sides can see the same play and their bias gives two different interpretations of that bang-bang play. Our role as officials is to use our training and skills to render an interpretation that’s not colored by a bias for any particular outcome.
As for what is within OBR, 5.06 and 5.09 are not in conflict or contradictory in my opinion. 5.06 gives the parameters for when a runner is considered to have legally acquired the right to the base reached. (Think: two runners occupying the same base; who has legally acquired the base and who do we call out?)
5.09 gives a simple “either/or” parameter for determining when a batter or runner is out. There’s not a lot of ambiguity there; no “if’s” or “maybe’s”, just a binary YES/NO parameter.
The notion of “ties” and “simultaneous” are flawed points of argument. Either the ball was in the glove or the foot was on the bag first, at some measurement of nanoseconds or picoseconds or zeptoseconds of time as we perceive it.
Get off the “tie” fence and make the call.
Funny you should bring up Einstein and relativity (tongue in cheek, a bit, I hope). I have two additional blog posts that touch on this very issue. You might enjoy …
• The Theory of Umpire General Relativity
• First Base Bites
Thanks !
Nick
“This is interesting, because McClelland is saying he’s going with 5.06(a)(1) and leaves it at that. ” This is an incorrect assumption. This QA session with McClelland’s can be found in articles dated as early as 2009.
McClelland said, “But the rule book does say that the runner must beat the ball to first base”. This is not a reference to 5.063(a), but the pre-2010 version of rule 7.08(e)
The rule pre-2010
7.08(e) A runner is out when… failing to reach the next base before a fielder tags said runner or the base…
The rule post-2010
7.08(e) A runner is out when… He or the next base is tagged before he touches the next base,
Section 5.06 covers “Running the Bases” and Rule 5.06(a)(1) “A runner acquires the right to an unoccupied base when he touches it before he is out.” BEFORE HE IS OUT.
How do you get out? See section 5.09 “Making an Out”
Both 5.09(a)(10) and 5.09(b)(6) have agreed since 2010 that the base must be touched BEFORE the runner.
Ties don’t exist, but if they did they would go to the runner.
You are exactly correct. This part of the article is not an accurate interpretation of the rules:
“However, the third rule we cited [5.06(a)(1)] is equally clear that a runner is safe so long as he reaches a base before he or the base (when a force) are tagged.”
The cited rule states “A runner acquires the right to an unoccupied base when he touches it before he is out”.
It’s odd that he says the rule is clear that he must reach a base before he is tagged. That’s not what it says. It says he has to reach the base before he is “out.” It doesn’t define what “out” is. You therefore have to go to his other two mentioned rules to determine what “out” is, and those are very clear that a tie would go to the runner (as the auther admits).
Exactly
Ties in science don’t exist, but we are not machines and neither are our umpires on the field. Therefore, ties do exist. I’ve ump’d for years and seen many controversial plays and have called several runners safe by way of tie at 1st base. Having been in the correct position on the field and having a great look at the play, tie was the determination. Look at the ball, listen for the bag. Not 100% but it’s the best we got and I have no regrets to any of those calls. Until we have more devices available to make such calls of the zepto variety, human opinion is the best we got so ties do exist, till then.
@GARRETT WILLIAMSON I never heard “Look at the ball, listen for the bag.” I was taught the other way around to watch the runner’s foot hit the bag and listen for the ball. I guess it doesn’t really matter if the play is so close as not be discernable with human observation.
If you listen for the ball, and watch the base….and both seem to happen at the same time…then the runner is out. Because light travels faster than sound. You are seeing “the tie” at the same second as the sound, therefore the sound was a nanosecond earlier than the sight. (If I remember my science). If you watch a person hit a ball from a great distance, you hear the ball get hit, what seems like seconds after you saw it. That is my theory and I have been doing this for 30+ years. Never really been a problem to me.
Yea, I thought about “light travels faster than sound” aspect as well, but at such a distance the difference is not humanly discernable.
The author of this article has it completely backwards. John Safarik has it right. The runner is out only when he or the bag is tagged BEFORE he touches it. This is written in common English. As far as the third rule it says a runner is safe at the next base if he reaches it BEFORE he is out. So what’s the definition of out? See the first two rules. So simple: Tie goes to the runner.
I wrote 14.1 (aka Straight Pool) league rules for league play. (The actual game was played according to the BCA rules for 14.1) My rules were endorsed by the old Billiard Congress of America. This is exactly how I worded rules in order to avoid disputes. It’s only confusing until you read exactly what’s written without making inferences.
I think your interpretation is incorrect. The first two rules state clearly the runner is safe if the base or runner is not tagged “before” he reaches the bag. A tie does not tag the runner or touch the base “before” the runner thus the runner is safe.
The third rule merely reiterates that the runner is safe, unless he is out. Since he has to be tagged or forced “before” he touches the bag, he is safe in a tie.
You all are missing the bigger picture. 509 a refers to a batter, meaning from home to 1st. 509 b refers to a runner, someone after 1st or returning back to a base. 506 a refers to occupying a base.
Soooo, ball or tag must occur BEFORE the batter/runner…..
In order to occupy a base you must occupy it BEFORE being put out as defined in 509… (Which is labeled “MAKING AN OUT”)
No one has changed this version, because it says what it means. The bible says, “Thow shall not kill”, but David killed Goliath???? Can’t just pull text out of CONTEXT, if you do, it just becomes a CON ;0)
No matter what is true, I’ve heard announcers say it many times in my long life that the tie gets to the runner. That s all.
No such thing as a tie because no human can judge that 2 independent events (ball impacting fielder’s glove and runner impacting base) occurred simultaneously and instantly. Either throw/catch beat runner or runner beat catch. Umpire always has to make judgement call based on visual and audible evidence.
Think your logic is backwards. If humans have limited perception, then events at different times can seem simultaneous.
Look, there is statutory law and there is common law. In this case, statutory law does not allow for the possibility of a tie. Therefore the umpire must determine which event happened first and make the call. If the umpire is unable to determine what event happened first (seems simultaneous) then he will rely on case law which gives the benefit of the doubt to the fielder.
I think we can solve the whole argument with a simple modification of the old adage, “Ties go to the runner.” Instead, try the axiom, “There are no ties in baseball, just late tags.”
When you say “However, the third rule we cited [5.06(a)(1)] is equally clear that a runner is safe so long as he reaches a base before he or the base (when a force) are tagged,” you are completely misquoting the rule.
There is no contradiction at all. The rule says, “A runner acquires the right to an unoccupied base when he touches it before he is OUT”. Notice that it says before he is out, not before he (or the base) is tagged.
Exactly
It is amazing this article has not been pulled down or corrected given how wrong it is. A complete misinterpretation of the rules. See Matt’s comment from 27 March 2018 which is exactly correct. The internet lasts forever & I have been sent the link to this article once again today.
If you think ‘tie goes to the runner’ is not the rule because ‘tie’ is not mentioned in the rule book then you will need to accept that if tie does not go to the runner then what you are proposing is that a runner can be on the base and yet be declared out on a tag which is clearly non sensical.
If you think ‘tie’ not specifically being mentioned in the rule book is problematic you also have to accept that calling someone safe is also problematic as the only time safe is mentioned in the rules is on an interference call, or just whenever the umpire says.
The rules define Outs and all the rules specifically state that the ball must beat the runner. The umpire should be looking for Outs and that’s it. To that extent ruling on a tie is not relevant as it is not an Out. But the axiom ‘tie goes to the runner’ is the correct interpretation of the rules. If umpires give the benefit of the doubt to the defence then so be it, but the rule interpretation in this article is completely wrong.