illegal sub?

[Gre144]

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

[mick]

Originally posted by Gre144
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

[Gre144]

Originally posted by mick

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.

[Bfair]

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

[Gre144]

Originally posted by Bfair
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?

[Gre144]

Originally posted by Gre144

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 ejected, right?

[Gre144]

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

[Gre144]

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]

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Gre144
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

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.

[Gre144]

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]

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Gre144
]
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.

[Gre144]

Originally posted by Bfair
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 Bob, is the above statement wrong?

[Gre144]

Originally posted by mick

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

So Bob is Mick's statement wrong?

[Bfair]

Originally posted by Gre144

So Bob, is the above statement wrong?

---

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

---

Greg, I added to the post this Fed caseplay for you to review:

3.1.1 SITUATION J: 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. Ruling: Unless the umpire has knowledge that S1 had in fact been in the game earlier, S1 cannot be treated as an illegal substitute.

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

[Gre144]

Originally posted by Bfair

---

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

---

Greg, I added to the post this Fed caseplay for you to review:

3.1.1 SITUATION J: 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. Ruling: Unless the umpire has knowledge that S1 had in fact been in the game earlier, S1 cannot be treated as an illegal substitute.

[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?