Close…Ruth was the starting pitcher in that game. Apparently, he wasn’t just thrown out for arguing, but for punching the umpire in the ear! Ernie Shore was the reliever, and, as you say, picked off the runner and retired the next 26 in order.
I don’t think this works, because under the Official Rules of Baseball, you can’t get credit for a triple on a play where an out is made on a preceding runner at home.
Thees is not an out made at home. The runner from third steps past home plate without touching it, and just stands there. Much in the situation where a guy crashes the catcher at home. If the catcher drops the ball but the runner got knocked around and past the plate then he is allowed to run back and touch the plate. I have seen it where the catcher thought he held the ball long enough to get the out, and the runner thought he had touched the plate. And they both stand there waiting for the ump to make a call, but he doesn’t because the runner wasn’t out, nor had a run scored yet. So it was still a live play until one of those happened, and sometimes takes 15 seconds of inanction until somebody realizes it and does something.
in my example the runner is in the same limbo, because he hasn’t touched the plate, but he hasn’t been tagged out, and nobody else has reached home yet. He’s still a live runner until the out at third was made. At least that’s the case I was going for.
Re: Date of cartoon.
I have seen this cartoon before in a newspaper (obviously it was a reprint), and the conclusion at the time was that the first pitcher was tossed before the first out.
As far as the first part of the question, I believe there are multiple ways for that situation to happen.
However in your situation, someone is eventually going to be called out.
I think the batter could only get credit for a triple if the middle runner was tagged out between third and home. However, then the runner on third would be credited with a run scored if the defense leaves the field.
The defense could ask for a “fourth out” if they think the runner crossing home didn’t touch it. But then you go back to the situation where there would be an out at first.
It’s possible that the question might have been written in a time when the rules regarding scoring extra base hits was different.
I think you would need a scenario that will require one of two things:
- runner being hit by batted ball - which gives the batter a signal
- batter hitting a triple and the runner on base missing home.
The situation I’m imagining at the end of the inning is this.
Runner from third standing behind home, not having scored or been put out.
runner from second , touched third, is writhing on the ground twenty feet from home.
runner from first touched second, and third, turned around and is running back to third.
Batter has touched first, second, and third and turned a few steps toward home.
At this point the batter passes the guy from first, and causes the third out himself.
I can’t find a ruling about that exact circumstance, the closest is
I don’t know how intergral to the rule the part about being tagged out rather than an automatic put-out, And the attempt to return bit.
I guess If I changed it so that the batter passes third, sees guy from first coming toward him, turns back to third, and is tagged out it would work, but I still like my original idea.
Yeah, I think that will work. However, the defense would still need to appeal the play at the plate to ensure that no run scores. The rulebook doesn’t seem to indicate what the call is when a runner misses home and the defense doesn’t appeal the play.
This would be a “fourth out” situation.
But is this puzzler about American tenpin bowling? Or maybe about English Cricket, where they also have a player called a bowler?
Perhaps 5-pin bowling, where a perfect game is, I believe, 450.
Err, not to continue the hijack, but you have heard of a safety, right? 2-0 is completely possible in the NFL without a forfeit.
You’d never bowl a 302 in cricket. Bowling statistics in cricket are notated in the form “overs-maidens-runs-wickets.” My best quick explanation of this: “overs” represents the number of overs (a series of six deliveries or “pitches” as it is in baseball) bowled, “maidens” the number of overs bowled in which no run was scored, “runs” the number of runs scored off the bowling, and “wickets” the number of “outs” obtained. So, the best bowling I ever had for my college was 7-0-49-3, usually abbrieviated as “three (wickets) for 49 (runs).”
Did anyone ever concede 302 runs in cricket? I couldn’t find an example, though, since the record is 362 runs in an innings (by Arthur Mailey, 1926, South Australia v Victoria), it’s conceivable. On the other hand, five batsmen have scored 302 in an innings, the last one A. Kripal Singh in 1989 (Tamil Nadu v Goa).
[/incredibly obscure cricketing trivia]