Rule check: Red Sox-Blue Jays delayed for unusual run-scoring play

TORONTO -- Did that run count? How many outs were there? What the heck is a fourth out? What on earth just happened?

For 15 minutes following the end of the top of the seventh of the Red Sox-Blue Jays series opener on Monday night at Rogers Centre, that’s what everyone in both dugouts was asking. Depending on which dugout you were in, you had different answers. Here’s the scene, step by step, which led to the chaos and the Red Sox being awarded a run long after touching home plate.

The first play: With runners on first and second and no outs, Nick Sogard shot a hard, low liner to Vladimir Guerrero Jr. at first base. The ball hit the ground, though, and he threw to shortstop Andrés Giménez at second base for the first out of the inning, allowing Sogard to stay at first and Anthony Seigler to advance to third. The Red Sox were down 2-0 at this point, pressing to get back into the game.

The confusion: The scoreboard displayed two outs, and the play was also announced to the media as a double play at the time.

The final play: Ceddanne Rafaela flew out to center fielder Brett Bateman, but there seemed to be confusion among players on both sides about whether that was the second or third out. Bateman lobbed the ball back in, which eventually made it to first base, where Vladdy tagged the bag.

It felt like something was… off?

This is when the meetings began between the umpiring crew and Red Sox interim manager Chad Tracy and Blue Jays manager John Schneider. The players were getting involved, too, with Max Scherzer eager to share his opinion on the matter from the Blue Jays’ dugout. The question at the center of the confusion was whether the runner from third scored, and whether that run would ultimately count. This was especially confusing on a play where some players seemed to be under different impressions about the number of outs.

“What we have here is we have a time play,” crew chief Chris Guccione announced to the crowd, “meaning when the third out was made at first base with the runner not tagging up, the runner that was on third base also did not tag but crossed home plate before the third out was made at first base. So we're going to New York to do a rules check."

After checking in with the replay review crew in New York, the umpiring crew huddled once more with each manager and Guccione again addressed the crowd and television audience.

"After calling New York and getting it all straightened out, the run is going to score,” Guccione announced. “End of the inning. Two runs for Toronto, one run for Boston."

This is where the distinction of a “time play” is important, not a “force play.” This is based in Rule 5.09(c)(4), stating that when an appeal play takes place on an inning-ending play, “the appeal play decision takes precedence in determining the out.”

It’s incredibly rare, with recent examples including a Pirates-Nationals game on June 29, 2022, and a Dodgers-Diamondbacks game on April 12, 2009. Back to Guccione for the crew’s full explanation:

“Both Boston runners, thinking there were two outs, just took off,” Guccione told a pool reporter following the game. “When the second out was made, now we have two runners who have failed to return and tag up correctly. At that time, the guy from third had crossed home plate and the guy who was at first was standing at second. Toronto knew he hadn’t tagged up and threw to first base to make the third out. Well, that’s a time play, meaning it’s not a force play. If it’s a force play, the run does not score automatically. If it’s a time play -- meaning, ‘Was the out made before or after the runner crossed home plate?’ -- in this case, the runner crossed before the appeal play was made [at first]. In this play, it’s what you call an apparent fourth out.”

Since it was ruled that Toronto’s fielders had left the field of play -- meaning they’d all crossed the third-base line -- they were no longer allowed to appeal to third base, which would have been necessary to stop that run from scoring. Instead, the Blue Jays had only appealed to first base by the time the play was considered to be “over,” and under Rule 5.09(c)(4), that appeal to first took precedent on the time play.

"It didn't cross my mind until I walked into the dugout, remembering that the timing play exists," third baseman Charles McAdoo told Sportsnet's Hazel Mae after the game. "And that was a situation where it came into play. And right when I walked in the dugout, I was like, 'Darn it, I missed it.'"

Ultimately, the ruling didn’t impact the outcome of the game, which the Blue Jays won, 2-1, to open the series.

What the managers said

Schneider: “They told me that all of my players were across the third-base line before [home-plate umpire] Charlie [Ramos] waves off the run, which I 100% disagree with. I don’t know if Vlad is that fast after he got the ball at first. We weren’t given the opportunity to appeal to third. Going forward, when that play happens again in the next 100 years, if it’s us, we will record the lead out at third. That’s the best I got.”

Tracy, who had never seen a “fourth out” play and called it “fortunate” for Boston: “We’ve got to know there’s one out, regardless of what’s on the board or not. Yes, it was a very weird situation where players on both sides appeared to be confused on the outs.”