Evening star., 1919-03-21

"nat are the rights OF the cOacher?
What are his 1atitudes in directing
the advance Of the base runner?
While many fans may not attach
much Importance to the men who act
as coachers at first and third bases.
in many ball games they are the de-
termining factors. particularly the
man coaching at third base. Just
now far the coacher can go in di-
recting the base runner is a mooted
question among fans since the coming
of the rule that caused the base run
ner to be automatically retired the
moment the coacher at third touched
him at that base or while rounding
that base for the plate.
Recently / received the following
query, dealing with "a play at first
base, and the part the coacher played
in the situation:
The runner on first was a fast man.
The score at the time was tie. two
men were out, and 1t was pretty GER
tain the runner would attempt a steal,
realizing that If he put it over he
would be in an excellent position to
break up the game The pitcher,
wise to the base runners intention,
threw to first base a half dozen times,
hoping to catch him mapping, but
satisfied if he so tired the runner in
making him slide back into the base
he mig hit cause him to change his
mind about trying to steal and if he
did try, he might be so tired he would
be unable to do so.
In the first FIVE attempts to catch
the runner the plays at first were
close. The runner. because Of the big
lead he was taking. was forced to
pull his most deceptive slide to avoid
the touch. On the sixth attempt the
pitcher made bad throw to first base.
The runner hit the dirt and the first
q play on the ball. and being unable
to do SO, managed to so fall on the
runner the latter wasn't certain Just
what was the proper thing to do. Only
the shouts of his teammate made him
believe, the ball must have gotten
away from the first sacker. The
coacher at first base. excited over the
play, left the lines Of his position.
grabbed the runner on the ground and
let him know the ball had been
thrown wild. at the same time urging
him to try for second.
Getting to his feet, the runner man.
aged to reach third base before the
right fielder was able to get the ball
and send it back into the infield. The
team in the field contended the UNI
pire should have called the base run
ner out instead OF granting him third,
insisting coacher at first base had
no more right to touch a base rum
ner than coacher at third base. The
umpire refused to listen to such a
contention. granted the man third
base. and said the rule did not apply
to a coacher at first. Did the umpire
render the proper ruling?
II such play came up in a major
league game in which I was the Of
fetal. would render the same ruling.
The umpire was right in his claim
the touching Of runner at first by
the coacher did not automatically re-
tire the runner. as at third base.
While perhaps the coacher did over
step a trifle in leaving his lines. and
forcib1y letting the runner know he
had a chance for at least another
base, I don't believe his action had
play as described has come up in the
majors a number Of times, and the
umpires in charge of the games al
ways have taken the same view. 1t
is really a common sense interpreta-
tion of the rights Of the coacher.
Most penalties meted out to the
coacher are the Aesult Of happenings
at third base. The rules pay consid-
erable attention to the manner in
which the coacher at that base be-
haves. We know the base runner is
out il touched by the coacher at
third, or while rounding that base on
his way to the plate. That rule was
largely to do away with
the foot ball tactics employed by the
coacher to prevent a runner from be-