Jones reenters the game in the 3rd inning in the wrong batting order, therefore becoming an illegal sub under fed rules. In the 7th inning, he bats in the correct order and hits a homerun. The defensive coach finally realizes that Jones didn't bat in the correct order in the 3rd inning and calls for the enforcement of an illegal substitution right after Jones hits a homerun and before the next pitch.

1) Does Jones illegal status still exist thus nullifying the homerun, and causing an ejection and an out?

or

2) Does the homerun count because Jones is now batting in the proper order?

Greg

Gre144,
144? That's gross. ;)
Jones illegal status disappeared after the next pitch to another batter when he batted out of turn in the third inning.
Allow the homer in the seventh.
mick

3-1-1:Penalty says that an illegal player on offense, whether as a batter or runner, shall be called out immediately and ejected upon discovery by an umpire or either team. I can't find it anywhere where it says an illegal substitute becomes a legal substitute if discovery is not made before the next pitch. It seems like in Fed that once an illegal sub always an illegal sub. With this in mind, Jones' homerun would be nullified since the discovery of his illegal substitution was made before the pitch to the next batter. I respectfully disagree with your answer. Please tell me where it explains how an illegal substitute becomes a legal substitute if we assume your answer to be correct.

Since this player was never discovered as an illegal sub when it occurred, you can't penalize him now for the past. You can only talk about the present.

The present being, he just a hit a home run in his proper spot in the batting order. That's a home run in my scorebook.

Freix

So an illegal substitute can become legalized if discovery is not made just after the illegal act occurred?

Assume Abel, Baker and Carter in that order. Abel is due up to bat but illegal sub Jones replaces him. Jones hits a single and discovery is made immediately.

1) Who would be credited with the out, Jones or Abel?
2) Would the next batter be Abel or Baker?

Thanks,

Greg

So an illegal substitute can become legalized if discovery is not made just after the illegal act occurred? In the situation that I brought up illegal sub Jones became legal and therefore he gets his homerun and is neither out or ejcted, right? [/B][/QeUOTE] [/B][/QUOTE]
__________________________________________________ ________

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm am however noting that there is nowhere in Fed rules that says an illegal sub becomes legal if discovery is not made before the next pitch. On the contrary, for BOO, if discovery is not made before the next pitch, the person BOO becomes the proper batter(7-1-2-c) For an illegal Sub 2-36-3-b merely states that a player who re-enters the game in the wrong position in the batting order is an illegal sub. Theoretically, we can apply this situation to Jones who re-entered in the 3rd inning in the wrong order. Even though Jones was batting in the correct order in the 7th inning, if we are to take 2-36-3-b literally and without assumptions, his homerun should be nullified since the coach discovered just after the homerun that Jones entered as an illegal sub in the 3rd inning. I am sure you are right, however, I am curious where it describes in the rule book(as it does in 7-1-2-c for BOO) how an illegal sub becomes a legal sub.

Greg


[Edited by Gre144 on Jul 14th, 2001 at 10:55 AM]

PArt of the problem with this scenario, Greg, is that it could be two different things. Did Jones reenter in the wrong spot in the third (illegal sub) and then bat out of order in the 7th, or reenter in the right spot in the third, but bat out of order.

Suppose Jones starts, but is replaced by Irwin in the first. The batting order is now A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I.

1) Jones reports reentering in the third for Abel (illegal sub), and bats in Abels spot. The (illegal) batting order is J,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I. In the 7th, with Irwin due up, Jones bats and hits a homer. This is both an illegal sub and a BOO situation. The illegal sub penalty applies. The homer is taken off the board, Jones is ejected, Abel must be replaced with a legal sub (or can reenter). Baker is due up next.

2) Jones reports reentering for Irwin, but bats when Abels spot is due up. The defense could ask for a BOO penalty here, but don't. In the 7th, Jones bats in his spot and hits a homerun. Nothing illegal here (in the 7th). Play on. This is the play Mick and Steve responded to.

You also asked:
[quote]Assume Abel, Baker and Carter in that order. Abel is due up to bat but illegal sub Jones replaces him. Jones hits a single and discovery is made immediately.

1) Who would be credited with the out, Jones or Abel?
2) Would the next batter be Abel or Baker? [/quote

1) Who cares. We're umpires, not statisticians or scorekeepers. ;)

2) Baker would bat next.

1) Does Jones illegal status still exist thus nullifying the homerun, and causing an ejection and an out?

or

2) Does the homerun count because Jones is now batting in the proper order?

Greg

[/B][/QUOTE]

PArt of the problem with this scenario, Greg, is that it could be two different things. Did Jones reenter in the wrong spot in the third (illegal sub) and then bat out of order in the 7th, or reenter in the right spot in the third, but bat out of order.

Suppose Jones starts, but is replaced by Irwin in the first. The batting order is now A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I.

1) Jones reports reentering in the third for Abel (illegal sub), and bats in Abels spot. The (illegal) batting order is J,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I. In the 7th, with Irwin due up, Jones bats and hits a homer. This is both an illegal sub and a BOO situation. The illegal sub penalty applies. The homer is taken off the board, Jones is ejected, Abel must be replaced with a legal sub (or can reenter). Baker is due up next.

[/B][/QUOTE]

If Jones bats for Irvin in the 7th how could he be batting out of order or be an illegal sub(are you implying that anyone who re-enters and BOO is always an Illegal Sub?) if this was the person that Jones was legally suppose to bat for? Also, wouldn't Abel be the next batter since he follows Irvin for whom Jones is batting for? If not, how did you get Baker to be the next batter when Abel, who follows Irvin/Jones, hasn't been up to bat? Greg

[Edited by Gre144 on Jul 15th, 2001 at 09:29 PM]

Once Jones re-enters illegally for Abel, Jones is an illegal sub for the rest of the time he is in the game. If it's discovered while Jones is at bat, on base or before the next pitch (once he leaves base), Jones is out and out.

You are correct that Abel (or Abel's legal sub) will be the next batter. I looked at the illegal line-up I gave and put down the next batter after Jones, even though Jones was BOO.

So Bob, is the above statement wrong?

So Bob is Mick's statement wrong?

<hr color=red>
Greg, the point I was trying to make with this statement is that if Jones reentered the game in the 3rd in the wrong batting slot, but was not reported in and was not discovered AT THAT TIME as an illegal sub, then the umpire really never knew that an illegal sub was in the game, did he????

Therefore, when Jones rectifies his error in 7th and bats in his correct batting order slot of 7th and hits his home run, it is legal. The fact that he had been in and out of the game as an illegal sub is meaningless unless it is discovered while he IS an illegal sub.

Perhaps I should have been more clear in my first post. Sorry I was away from this thread for awhile.

Freix
<hr color=red>
Greg, I added to the post this Fed caseplay for you to review:
<ul><b>3.1.1 SITUATION J: </b>S1 comes in for F7 in the second inning, but is not discovered. In the seventh inning, S1 comes in for F8 and is batting when the opposing team contends that S1 was a substitute earlier in the game. <b>Ruling:</b> Unless the umpire has knowledge that S1 had in fact been in the game earlier, S1 cannot be treated as an illegal substitute.</ul>

[Edited by Bfair on Jul 16th, 2001 at 07:17 PM]

So lets assume that the umpire does realize after reviewing his line up card, that F7 batted illegaly in the 2nd. He therefore would be considered an illegal sub in the 7th, correct?

Maybe I am looking into this deep but it seems that in all offensive cases, except for a person who violates the courtesy runner rule, an illegal sub is someone who:

re-enters the game while BOO.

If this is not the case can you think of one situation where you have a illegal substitute who is batting in the correct order?(not including the exception for violating the rule for courtesy runners)

This brings me to my question:

Assume A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I

1) Illegal substitute Jones enters for batter A who is the proper batter . Discovery is made while Jones is at the plate. Would A (or a legal sub for A) or B replace Jones at the plate?


2) Ilegal Substitute Jones enters for Batter A when he should have entered for batter G. Jones hits a single. Batter B get up and receives the first pitch for a ball. Coach protest illegal substitution and BOO. Should B remain at the plate or should batter H take his place since Batter H is the batter who follows G for whom Jones should have replaced. I guess I'm wondering if Jones is locked in with G or is he now locked in with A since a ball was thrown to B?


[Edited by Gre144 on Jul 17th, 2001 at 01:54 AM]

Yes -- a player who is not eligible to reenter and who reenters the game, even in his "correct" batting spot is an illegal sub. See 2-36 for the 5 types of "illegal subs".

Quote:

This brings me to my question: Assume A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I 1) Illegal substitute Jones enters for batter A who is the proper batter . Discovery is made while Jones is at the plate. Would A (or a legal sub for A) or B replace Jones at the plate?

Didn't we just do this? What's the penalty for an illegal sub who is at bat? If A (or a legal sub) bats next, how do we prove the scorecard? Where (in what box on the scorecard) do we record the out? B is the next batter.

Quote:

2) Ilegal Substitute Jones enters for Batter A when he should have entered for batter G. Jones hits a single. Batter B get up and receives the first pitch for a ball. Coach protest illegal substitution and BOO. Should B remain at the plate or should batter H take his place since Batter H is the batter who follows G for whom Jones should have replaced. I guess I'm wondering if Jones is locked in with G or is he now locked in with A since a ball was thrown to B?

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.

Now, whether Mick and Steve's comments were right depends on which of the two scenarios I presented happened.

To try to answer THIS question for you, Greg, I would think that if I am calling this game, I am not going to leave this situation up to <u>memory</u>. I have at least 18 different ballplayers in 18 different batting slots. Now, add to that any subs in and out. For me to leave that up to memory (an illegal subbing situation not presented to me at the time of the infraction) there is too much risk of MY error. If the opposition felt there was an infraction, they should have brought it to my attention at the time the infraction occurred.

So my answer is that your question is not going to be considered by me while I am on the field. If not PROVEN that Jones reentered illegally AT THE TIME HE IS IN THE GAME ILLEGALLY, I will allow Jones to continue provided his current status is not illegal.

Just my opinion,

Freix

Didn't we just do this? What's the penalty for an illegal sub who is at bat? If A (or a legal sub) bats next, how do we prove the scorecard? Where (in what box on the scorecard) do we record the out? B is the next batter.

__________________________________________________ _________
I know your getting upset but know one has answered my question on who is credited for the out. It seems to me that if Jones is credited for the out while he is at the plate than you would simply bring in the person who would have been up had Jones not appeared as a batter. This would be batter A and allowing batter A to bat would fall in line with what we would do in a normal BOO situation. If you credit A with the out then batter B would seem to be the logical person to come up to bat.

If you credit an illegal sub with the out than how do you know who is the next batter? I think you are saying that you lock him in with the person that he illegally batter for. The next batter would simply be the batter who follows the the batter that should have batted.

Quote:

2) Ilegal Substitute Jones enters for Batter A when he should have entered for batter G. Jones hits a single. Batter B get up and receives the first pitch for a ball. Coach protest illegal substitution and BOO. Should B remain at the plate or should batter H take his place since Batter H is the batter who follows G for whom Jones should have replaced. I guess I'm wondering if Jones is locked in with G or is he now locked in with A since a ball was thrown to B?

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).

Hey, you should should start charging for you time! I understand completely now. What really helped me is how you emphasized that the "line up spot is credited with the out". Once you have figured out which line up spot is legitimate than the puzzle is solved-the next batter will be the batter who follows the proper legalized spot. It is perfectly clear in my head now. Thanks for all your help!

Greg