[greymule]

No runner shall be removed from the base occupied to bat in THEIR proper place except the batter-runner who has been taken off the base by the umpire as in (2) above. The correct batter merely misses THEIR - OK it's getting tiresome - turn at bat with no penalty. The batter following the correct batter in the batting order becomes the legal batter.

It's true that part 4 could stay where it is if written properly, but unfortunately the above still doesn't work.

A runner who has been taken off the base by the umpire as in (2) above has not been taken off to bat in his proper place. He has been removed from the base solely because he does not belong there, whether or not he is supposed to be batting next or soon or whatever.

Part 4 is confusing for many reasons. Though it is written to cover certain situations brought about by the failure of the defense to appeal properly, it muddies the water by unnecessarily making an exception regarding something already covered in part 2, which covers situations in which the defense has properly appealed. When the defense has properly appealed, the situation where the next legal batter is on base cannot arise. Therefore, jettison the section about "(2) above."

I suggest the following for part 4, and then I agree it can stay where it is:

4. If the failure of the defense to appeal an improper batter results in a later situation where a runner on base becomes the next legal batter, such correct batter merely misses his turn at bat with no penalty and stays on his base. The batter following the correct batter in the batting order becomes the next legal batter.

This could be followed by an example such as the one I gave or the one Mike gave.