[Az.Ump]

I don't think we need to go outside the rules to fix this. I believe Mike has this nailed without over thinking it. Reading ASA Rule 4 section 6-C 3 and 4 we can understand the intention. 3 tells us we get and out and a disqualification prior to a pitch or play. 4 tells us that after a pitch, that the at-bat and all actions are legitimized and only the illegal substitution can be corrected. The real question falls to who did the illegal sub enter the game for? Our assumption is for B8, but the rules give us no real guidance. We use our judgment and common sense to determine which players are affected. So lets run down the scenarios.

1)Illegal sub takes a pitch and defense protests. Sub disqualified B8 assumes count. B8 makes most sense.
2)Illegal sub reaches base, defense protests prior to pitch. Sub out and disqualified, B8 re-enters or legal sub enters. Move any runners back and B9 up. Again makes the most sense that illegal sub was for B8.
3)Illegal sub reaches base and B8 takes a pitch. Defense protests. 4-6-C-4 tells us we do not have an out and all previous play stands. To me there are two possible fixes to “Who's on First”
a) Sub disqualified, B8 re-enters or legal sub to replace at base occupied and B9 assumes count. This still assumes the illegal sub was for B8. Of course the issue becomes how can B8 be on base and bat at the same time?
b) Sub disqualified B7 re-enters or legal sub to replace at base occupied and B8 continues to bat. Instead of multiple illegal subs we have illegal sub for B7 who BOO. First pitch to B8 make at bat legal and we just fix the illegal sub.

To me the offense screwed up with the illegal substitution but the defense screwed up but by letting it go to long. My reading of 4-6-C-4 is the defense has lost its opportunity to get an out and undo play and this is now just a fix it. I do not believe that ASA or NFHS wants a forfeit due to cascading illegal substitutes. But I could be wrong.

Paul