Quote:
Originally Posted by Crabby_Bob
IMHO, if you do it for one team, you must do it for the other team.
|
And I wouldn't have a problem doing it for the other team. In fact, if the opposing head coach complained that I jumped the gun by preventing him/her from appealing/protesting/complaining/whatever, I'll let him/her know, "Coach, I would've done the same for you if I had recognized the problem."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crabby_Bob
Are you that good in recognizing all nine players and their substitutes on both teams? If you miss such an infraction by the other team, and it it properly appealed (protested), how are you going to rule?
|
No, I'm not that good. And I would rule just as the book tells me if I don't catch the violation and the other coach appeals/protests/complains/whatever.
If the crux of the issue is the preventing the opposing team from gaining an opportune out, then why are umpires told they should intervene to prevent illegal substitutions? Isn't an illegal batter who gets on base and is then appealed/protested/complained/whatever disqualified and called out? The only difference is the disqualification penalty. Wouldn't the out+disqualification be more of a benefit to the offended team than just the out?
Look, I really can go either way with this. If the official guidance from OKC is that we must allow a substitute to play unreported if we happen to notice it, then so be it. But I prefer to consider it as preventive umpiring, no different than informing a coach when he/she is about to conduct his/her fourth defensive conference, "Coach, you do realize that you'll have to remove your pitcher with this one, right?"