View Single Post
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 21, 2010, 09:06am
mbyron mbyron is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
No ejection because there was no warning (or time for a warning). Braxton should have faced the batter next due up. For the purposes of this rule, the "at bat" begins as soon as the previous "at bat" ends.
I checked J/R on this obscure point, and I agree. J/R has the pitcher being replaced after a second, prohibited visit, "but only after the batting slot has been completed."

They also have the manager ejected only after having been warned that the second visit is prohibited. The ejection is mainly for ignoring the warning, not for the second, prohibited visit.
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote