Quote:
Originally posted by FSCoach
HS Game: Man on First no outs. Visiting team pinch hits. Pinch Hitter checks into the game with the Home Plate umpire. The pinch hitter is wearing uniform #13.
The pinch hitter bunts and the runner from first to second is retired at second and the pinch hitter is safe on first base.
The home team (in the field) points out to the umpire that there is already a #13 in the game and that the situation should be treated like a batting out or order or illegal subsitution. They claim, that they have no way of telling if the new hitter wasn't the other #13 who had made an out in the previous inning.
(There really are 2 different #13's on the bench at the start of the game but no official rosters or lineup cards that would make that clear before the start of the game.)
After some discusion, the umpires call the pinch hitter out and now have two outs in the inning with no one on base.
Did they make right call?
|
No!
The name makes the player, not the number. I've done games that have a mixture of varsity and JV duplicate numbers, or games where a team has purchased additional uniforms and duplicated a number. Always go by the player's name, not the number.
The FED case book has a similar interpretation: "1.1.2 SITUATION: F4, Brown, listed in the batting order as wearing uniform No. 4, is wearing No 21. After reaching base in the third inning, defensive coach appeals to the umpire that Brown is batting out of order. Ruling: While Brown is in technical violation of the rule that requires that player's name, shirt number and position be on the lineup card, there is no penalty, since the batting-out-of-order rule requires only that the name be in the proper order. If the number was correct but the player batting was not Brown, the batting-out-of-order penalty would be imposed. Listing of both numbers and positions provides easier record keeping for scorekeepers and umpires."