illegal sub?

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Gre144

The penalty for illegal sub supercedes the penalty for BOO. I've got J in for A, out-and-out, and B remains at the plate. Had this been discovered before the pitch to B, then it's not covered in the rules. IMHO, J is still out-and-out, A needs to reenter (or be replaced), and H is the proper batter.

quote from Bob
__________________________________________________ ________
If a ball is thrown to B then you have J as the proper batter on first who is an illegal sub. B should then be replaced by the person who follows J which is either B( since J batter for A) or H (since H follow G for whom J should have batted for). I guess I don't know who you consider as the batter that follows J, would it be B or H?

If discovery is made while illegal Sub J is at bat, the question remains do you treat it similarly as Batting Out of Order and just allow A to replace J? (Additionally you would eject J and call him out since he is an illegal sub)Or do you allow the person who follows J to be at bat which would either be B or H depending on whether J is locked in with A for whom he illegally came to the plate for or whether he is locked in with G for whom he should have batted.

Thanks,

Totally confused,

Greg

[Edited by Gre144 on Jul 17th, 2001 at 04:06 PM]

I know you are confused -- let the lesosn be to keep a good scorecard and not allow illegal subs into the game.

Now, on to your questions ...

If J does not start, and then goes into the game, and then comes out of the game, he is supposed to be done for the day. If he reenters for A (that was your play 1), he's an illegal sub, but he's still a sub. So, A is out of the game, and J is batting in A's spot. If he's discovered to be illegal he is out -- it's not like a BOO situation where the "penalty" is just to place the proper batter at the plate. In the box score, record an out. I'm not a scorekeeper or a statistician, so I don't care which batter is given an out or which fielder is credited with the putout. The first line-up spot has an out, and that means the second line-up spot is at bat. Now, since J was a sub for A, and J is ejected, someone else must come in to fill the first line-up spot. That can be A, if A has re-entry priveliges, or it can be another legal sub.

Let's make this as clear as I can -- If illegal J enters and bats for A (when it's A's turn at the plate), then he is out and B is the next batter.

Your second play is more confusing because you have *both* an illegal sub *and* BOO. The rule and case book doesn't cover this -- presumably because it would be a very rare occurrence. Personally, I'd enforce the "out-and-out" penalty for illegal sub, but treat the batting order as in the BOO situation. This would prevent a manager from possibly gaming the system.

So, again, J subs into the game, is removed and then illegally subs for A. Despite illegally subbing for A, he shows up to bat when it's supposed to be G's turn at the plate. B follows J (as he's supposed to) to the plate.

If this is discovered after a pitch to B, then J's turn at the plate is "legitimized" and B is the proper batter. Since J is still an illegal sub, though, J is still removed from the base, charged with an out, and ejected. A proper sub (including re-entry by A, if possible) for A must be made.

If this is discovered before a pitch to B (or even while J is at bat), then J's turn at bat is *not* "legitimized" and H will be the next batter. J, still an illegal sub, is "out-and-out." G doesn't get to bat (that's the part of the BOO we enforce), but is not also charged with an out (we can't get two outs from the same spot in the order with only one at-bat).