Quote:
Originally posted by TexBlue
OK, I'm confused and I don't know why. It could be Grey Mules grammatical discussion or I just am misunderstanding the situation.
Originally posted by Dakota
Anyway, to the scenario...
B1 put out through ordinary play.
B3 put out through ordinary play.
B2 declared out on the BOO appeal.
B3 is due up as the legal batter to follow B2, but due to the exception in "c", B4 bats first in the next inning.
Now, I'm with you so far and agree wholeheartedly. Why would B3 ever come back to bat again in this situation? I know it's all in English, not even King's English, but good ole American English, am I missing something? Mach3's post is asking about B3 batting again and is told that is correct. Can you help a poor ole country boy out here? I may need pictures, I don't know.
|
If B3 had not been put out, B3 would be due up since B3 follows B2. Here is the section of the rule that pertains...
ASA 7-2C EFFECT-2c (whew!)
Quote:
|
The next batter is the player whose name follows that of the player called out for failing to bat.
|
Since B2 was the player called out for failing to bat, B3 would be due up. However, paragraph c continues...
Quote:
|
EXCEPTION: If the incorrect batter was out as a result of their time at bat, and is scheduled to be the next proper batter, skip that player and the next person in the line-up will be the batter.
|
B3 was the incorrect batter, and was put out on the play, and would be the next batter due up, so she is skipped and B4 comes to bat.