The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 09, 2006, 09:44am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 41
Here we go again, I wish to double check my understanding of this rule.

Example: Batter 1 comes to plate and gets a single. B2 makes an out. Now, instead of B3 coming to the plate, B4 steps into the box. B4 gets a single and B1(R1) advances to third. B3 now comes to the plate and steps into box (live ball).

Situation A) before first pitch to B3, defensive team requests time and brings the problem to the attention of the PU. Solution: B3 is ruled out, B4 is brought back to plate, and B1(R1) is returned to first. B5 will be the next batter. Correct?

Situation B) defensive team brings it to the attention of PU after a pitch was delivered to B3. Solution: B3 is replaced with B5 and assumes B3's count. B4 stays at first and B1 stays at third. Correct?

Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 09, 2006, 10:36am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 279
A) Correct.

B) Correct.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 09, 2006, 11:12am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Little Elm, TX (NW Dallas)
Posts: 4,047
Mostly correct... possibly completely correct.

In B... We really have two separate violations now.

If the manager comes out, and points at B4 on first base, saying that he shouldn't have batted, I believe our answer is just "sorry, coach, once a pitch has been thrown, he (pointing at B4) has been legitimized."

If he says ANYTHING about the current batter, either before or after this comment, we must correct that BOO as well.

But if he says nothing about B3 at all, I don't believe we have either the requirement or the right to fix that eventual BOO. I know there are words in the book regarding doing what we can to prevent protestable situations, but I don't believe this falls in there. I'm sure there are those who might legitimately feel that sending B3 back to the dugout in favor of B5 is preventative umpiring, but I don't think I'm one of those umpires. To my mind, if the rulesmakers wanted umpires to prevent BOO, we would be required to do so without it being brought to our attention. Since we don't do it without appeal, and technically this appeal was (or could have been) about B4 only, I'm not sure it would be appropriate to address it yet.
__________________
"Many baseball fans look upon an umpire as a sort of necessary evil to the luxury of baseball, like the odor that follows an automobile." - Hall of Fame Pitcher Christy Mathewson
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 09, 2006, 12:56pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 279
Quote:
Originally posted by mcrowder
Mostly correct... possibly completely correct.

In B... We really have two separate violations now.

If the manager comes out, and points at B4 on first base, saying that he shouldn't have batted, I believe our answer is just "sorry, coach, once a pitch has been thrown, he (pointing at B4) has been legitimized."

If he says ANYTHING about the current batter, either before or after this comment, we must correct that BOO as well.

But if he says nothing about B3 at all, I don't believe we have either the requirement or the right to fix that eventual BOO. I know there are words in the book regarding doing what we can to prevent protestable situations, but I don't believe this falls in there. I'm sure there are those who might legitimately feel that sending B3 back to the dugout in favor of B5 is preventative umpiring, but I don't think I'm one of those umpires. To my mind, if the rulesmakers wanted umpires to prevent BOO, we would be required to do so without it being brought to our attention. Since we don't do it without appeal, and technically this appeal was (or could have been) about B4 only, I'm not sure it would be appropriate to address it yet.

I think we should just correct the whole mess when it's brought to our attention. JMHO
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 09, 2006, 01:24pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 41
in situation B, if we do not replace B3 and B4 is on first, then who bats next? We cannot allow B3 to complete his time at bat and then allow B5 to bat, can we??
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 09, 2006, 01:46pm
MrB MrB is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 63
That is exactly what we do.

This is from NCAA, but OBR is the same as is FED

"If the defensive team has ignored an improper batter who now is on base when the “official” turn at bat arrives, the individual shall be passed over and the next person in the lineup shall be the proper batter."
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 09, 2006, 01:47pm
MrB MrB is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally posted by largeone59
Quote:
Originally posted by mcrowder
Mostly correct... possibly completely correct.

In B... We really have two separate violations now.

If the manager comes out, and points at B4 on first base, saying that he shouldn't have batted, I believe our answer is just "sorry, coach, once a pitch has been thrown, he (pointing at B4) has been legitimized."

If he says ANYTHING about the current batter, either before or after this comment, we must correct that BOO as well.

But if he says nothing about B3 at all, I don't believe we have either the requirement or the right to fix that eventual BOO. I know there are words in the book regarding doing what we can to prevent protestable situations, but I don't believe this falls in there. I'm sure there are those who might legitimately feel that sending B3 back to the dugout in favor of B5 is preventative umpiring, but I don't think I'm one of those umpires. To my mind, if the rulesmakers wanted umpires to prevent BOO, we would be required to do so without it being brought to our attention. Since we don't do it without appeal, and technically this appeal was (or could have been) about B4 only, I'm not sure it would be appropriate to address it yet.

I think we should just correct the whole mess when it's brought to our attention. JMHO
This is from NCAA book

"A.R.—The umpires, official scorer or public-address announcer shall not call attention to the improper batter. If this occurs, the umpire-in-chief shall warn the official scorer and/or the public-address announcer that on the next infraction the offending person will be removed from the position."

Leave it alone unless he asks.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 09, 2006, 02:30pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 41
Quote:
Originally posted by MrB
That is exactly what we do.

This is from NCAA, but OBR is the same as is FED

"If the defensive team has ignored an improper batter who now is on base when the “official” turn at bat arrives, the individual shall be passed over and the next person in the lineup shall be the proper batter."
FED 7-2-5

"When an improper batter becomes a proper batter because no appeal is properly made as above, the next batter shall be the batter whose name follows that of such legalized improper batter. The instant an improper batter's actions are legalized, the batting order picks up with the name following that of the legalized improper batter".

When the appeal was not made this legalized B4 at first. This is why B5 needs to be at the plate, not B3.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 09, 2006, 02:45pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Little Elm, TX (NW Dallas)
Posts: 4,047
Well, you completely missed his point.

WE do not bring the BOO (B3) to anyone's attention. If it IS brought to our attention, B5 is the proper batter... but his point was in response to your statement that "We cannot allow B3 to complete his time at bat" - yes we do, unless the BOO (B3's BOO, not B4's) is brought to our attention.
__________________
"Many baseball fans look upon an umpire as a sort of necessary evil to the luxury of baseball, like the odor that follows an automobile." - Hall of Fame Pitcher Christy Mathewson
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Fri Mar 10, 2006, 09:11am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 41
Quote:
Originally posted by mcrowder
Well, you completely missed his point.

WE do not bring the BOO (B3) to anyone's attention. If it IS brought to our attention, B5 is the proper batter... but his point was in response to your statement that "We cannot allow B3 to complete his time at bat" - yes we do, unless the BOO (B3's BOO, not B4's) is brought to our attention.
I understand that if an appeal is not made we do nothing, but if an appeal is made even after the first pitch to the next batter, we don't replace B3 unless coach states that B5 should be the next batter? We then allow B3 to bat and the next batter to be B5? I am sorry but I feel uncomfortable with this. Say B3 completes his time at bat, then coach says B5 cannot be the next batter, it should be B4 who is on base. I then say ..... Why put yourself in that position?

It seems to me that you make the correction whether or not the coach says anything about B3. This eliminates any future problems when B5 comes to the plate.

Now, I again may be missing your point (would not be the first time). Preventive umpiring or whatever it might be called, replacing B3 with B5 after an improper appeal is the spirit of the rule as I understand it. What difference does it make to me who is at bat, B3 or B5.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Fri Mar 10, 2006, 11:37am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,034
Quote:
Originally posted by smoump

I understand that if an appeal is not made we do nothing, but if an appeal is made even after the first pitch to the next batter, we don't replace B3 unless coach states that B5 should be the next batter? We then allow B3 to bat and the next batter to be B5? I am sorry but I feel uncomfortable with this. Say B3 completes his time at bat, then coach says B5 cannot be the next batter, it should be B4 who is on base. I then say ..... Why put yourself in that position?

The coach is appealing B4. Rule on that. Period. Don't rule on B3 until the coach "appeals" that. It's to the defenses benefit to have B3 batting out of order. Don't take that away from them until they ask you to (by pointing it out).

And, yes, once B3 finishes his at-bat, B5 is the next batter, if B4 is on base.

Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:23pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1