Tie Goes to the Fielder?
This article from the Financial Times notes that according to Barney Frank, the congressman "widely expected take over the chair of the House financial services committee if the Democrats retake the chamber," the creation of a global securities regulator should be considered.
Observing the growing need for cooperation between the US and foreign regulators such as the UK's Financial Services Authority, the article states:
"Doesn't that sound like fun," Mr Frank said of such co-operation. "Joint action is theoretically [good] but what does that mean? In American baseball, if the runner and the ball arrive at the base at the same time, the tie goes to the fielder. Who breaks a tie if there is a disagreement over policy between the SEC and FSA?"(emphasis added).
OK, so there is at least the prospect of a global securities regulator down the road, which is interesting. But is it as interesting as Frank's proclamation that in American baseball, the "tie goes to the fielder?"
Anyone who has played or coached baseball has heard the expression the "tie goes to the runner" many times. So what is this new rule that Mr. Frank is making up? Indeed, a Google search shows that there are only 5 (!) reported mentions of the phrase "tie goes to the fielder" in the history of the Internet, or whatever it is that Google scours. That compares to 12,200 mentions of the phrase "tie goes to the runner"
And yet... I think Mr. Frank may actually be right. According to baseball rule 7.08(e),
7.08 Any runner is out when-
(e) He fails to reach the next base before a fielder tags him or the base, after he has been forced to advance by reason of the batter becoming a runner.
Assuming there can be such a thing as a "tie" between the runner reaching the base and the ball reaching the fielder, it would seem to follow in such a case that the runner has failed to reach the base before the fielder tagged the base, and is therefore out.
So, Barney Frank, you appear to be correct. SLW salutes your willingness to buck popular wisdom, coin a new phrase, and tie it all back to securities litigation.
Any reader thoughts on this important issue?
| Permalink | Print Article | Back To Top |
Comments
I think 7.08(e) is directed to force outs, as the rest of the paragraph that you did not quote is focused on those types of runner outs. 7.01 is more on point. It declares that "[a] runner acquires the right to an unoccupied base when he touches it before he is out." Of course the point of your blog entry still holds: the rule's language suggests that "it goes to the fielder."
Posted by: yolatengo | October 31, 2006 2:35 PM