Curse Of The Appeal Play
The least fan friendly part of the game
Curse Of The Appeal Play
The one thing about baseball that frustrates me is the formality of the appeal play.
You know what I’m talking about. A runner on base didn’t tag up properly. The defensive team can only appeal this by giving the ball to the pitcher, having him step on the rubber, and then immediately throwing to the base that was missed to formally appeal to the umpire.
The roots of the appeal play seem to be in cricket, with the famous “Howzat” request for an “out” decision from the umpire. I’d argue that this helps explain the awkwardness of the appeal play, which seems to directly contradict the general rule in American sports that what you see is what you get.
I mentioned problems with the appeal play and its implications in this video:
Appeals have been recognized as a problem for quite some time. Consider this report of a June 1949 Braves - Cubs game:
The frustration here wasn’t necessarily that Gustine made a mistake on the basepaths. The frustration was that the celebration around the tying run was premature. And I’d argue that there is a good argument that simply ruling the runner out for failure to follow the rules would be much more satisfactory than changing the play after the fact.
For the sake of comparison, here’s how The Boston Globe covered the same game:
And, yeah, I deliberately kept that bit at the end about Eddie Matthews attached.
Let me know what you think.
If a runner advances after failing to tag up, the infielder immediately calls for the ball, touches the base, and tells the umpire which runner failed to tag. The ball does not have to go to the pitcher. If the ball goes out of play or if time is called, then it must go to the pitcher, who steps on and then off the rubber and throws to the infielder manning the missed base.