View Single Post
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Tue Feb 25, 2014, 06:55am
youngump youngump is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,210
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve View Post
Restating what Big Slick stated, in complete agreement.

Yes, the starting FLEX does NOT have to re-enter to re-establish the FLEX position; as stated in the Approved Ruling, once the game starts with 10 positions, they all exist, even when one is currently vacant ("down to nine"). Any eligible sub can fill that position, just as the starting FLEX could re-enter (but didn't in the case questioned).

Let's look at the process. If the #5 batter #22 playing F3 is replaced by sub #21, and then #21 is replaced by sub #33, has #22 lost eligibility to re-enter? Was she "in effect" re-entered just so #33 could enter? No, and no. Logical subs in sequence do not deprive starter #22 of her re-entry right.

Well, it isn't any different in the OP. FLEX came out, replaced by DP. A different FLEX is legally entered to fill that spot; it doesn't deprive the starter of her re-entry right. All starters have re-entry rights, including DP and FLEX.
This isn't any different in any of the other codes right?

Relatedly, if the flex is out and the coach wants to substitute for her with the intention of having her go back to playing defense later would you allow it or call it a projected sub?
Reply With Quote