In the top of the seventh inning of Monday’s game between the Boston Red Sox and Toronto Blue Jays at Rogers Centre, a 17-minute rules review led to the Red Sox being awarded a run despite a double play that initially ended the inning.
The play began with runners on first and third with one out. Red Sox batter Ceddanne Rafaela hit a fly ball to center field, which was caught by Blue Jays center fielder Brett Bateman. Both runners, Anthony Siegler (third base) and Nick Sogard (first base), advanced believing there were two outs, as the stadium’s scoreboard incorrectly displayed two outs. The Blue Jays turned a double play by throwing the ball to first base before Sogard could return, ending the inning. However, the run by Siegler was later awarded after a review.
Blue Jays manager John Schneider disputed the ruling, stating that his team was not given the opportunity to appeal at third base. "After consulting with MLB, they told me that all of my players were across the third base line before Charlie Ramos waved off the run," Schneider said. "I 100% disagree with that."
Red Sox interim manager Chad Tracy acknowledged the break, saying, "We kind of got a break there."
The umpires consulted with MLB’s review center in New York, leading to a lengthy delay. Veteran umpire Chris Guccione later explained the ruling, stating that because the Blue Jays did not appeal Siegler as the "fourth out" at third base, the run scored by Siegler was valid. The delay lasted 17 minutes, during which players and fans awaited clarification.
The game ultimately ended in a 2-1 Blue Jays victory, with Toronto pitcher Jameson Taillon leaving due to right forearm discomfort. The Blue Jays’ rotation has faced ongoing challenges this season, adding to the significance of the win.
MLB rules state that if a defensive team fails to properly appeal a runner leaving early, any runs that score as a result may stand. In this case, the Blue Jays appealed Sogard at first base rather than Siegler at third, which triggered the review process. The ruling hinged on the interpretation of the "fourth out" rule, which allows a run to score if the appeal is not made correctly.
The incident has sparked discussions about the clarity of MLB’s rules and the role of technology in officiating. The scoreboard error contributed to the confusion, though the umpires’ final decision was based on the appeal process rather than the visual display.