I'm aware of that, but read RS 9 closely ... taking the rules and RS 9 at their word, the rule wording in Rule 1 (and RS 9) says nothing about WHY the pitcher was removed or WHO removed the pitcher, it only says if the pitcher was removed, it is not a charged conference. Since it is not a charged conference, there was no 4th charged conference for which to invoke the penalty, hence the pitcher was merely involved in a defensive swap or ordinary substitution and may return, subject to the sub/re-entry rules.
As written, there can never be more than 3 charged defensive conferences in any game, hence, the EFFECT can never be invoked, since if you do invoke it, you have now made what was going to be the 4th charged conference not a charged conference!
Tru in blu likes logical fallacies, so I was hoping he could tell us if this was a catch 22, circular logic, a deadlock, a double bind, a paradox....
