Quote:
Originally posted by WestMichBlue
NFHS 2.57.2: An Illegal Substitute is (c) the FLEX who enters the game as a batter in a different position in the batting order than the DP.
3.3.6.6: Placing the FLEX into one of the first nine positions for someone other than the original DP is considered an illegal substitution. The illegal substitute shall be removed from the game and restricted to the bench.
3.4.2 If illegal offensive players is discovered while at bat, then: Restriction, called out, proper batter loses her turn at bat, and next batter is up.
In the original scenario - if caught at bat, sub is out and restricted, B1 loses turn, B2 is up to bat.
If she is discovered between innings (as Chasbo noted) then
all play stands, but sub is still going to be restricted.
2003 ASA rules state the same with respect to the DEFO batting in the first nine position other than the DP. However, if discovered while at bat, illegal played is DQ'd, but not out, and regular batter comes up with same count.
WMB
|
WMB,
Those are fine, but inapplicable rules (the ones I could find), but it could still be rationalized that FLEX went in unannounced at #6 and batted out of turn.
Nowhere in the sitch was there shown an attempt that new FLEX tried to bat for anyone, but "possibly" DP.
Now, if B2 was in the on deck position and B1 was hidng in the dugout, then you may have something of an illegal sub sitch instead of a BOO sitch.
And nowhere in the sitch was there any discovery of BOO.
That was just a woulda, coulda, shoulda. But it didn't happen.
I do not see how a DQ can be assessed. I find it extremely difficult to believe that the spirit and intent of NFHS, in determining what to do with the excited new FLEX who batted out of turn, is to disqualify the player.
mick