Batting Out of Order
 

OK, this is going to be a VERY hypothetical situation, but I could see it happening at lower levels.

FED Rules:
Batting order is B1, B2, B3,....B9.

B2 bats in the spot of B1 and advances to first base. A legal/illegal pitch occurs to B3 so now B2's actions are legalized (7-1-2 PENALTY 3,5). This happens a few times in the order and now B2's batting spot is due up again, but B2 is sitting on third base. Who gets to bat in B2's spot?

If this is too confusing, I'm mostly looking at the note after 7-1-2 which states:

When several players bat out of order before discovery is made so that a player's time at bat occurs while he is a runner, such player remains on base, but he is NOT out as a batter.

Thanks,
Aaron

Assuming that the previous batter was legal (probably B1?), B3 is the proper batter if B2 is still on base.

This isn't possible. It would take one advancement to get him to third (B4 singles, let's say). Two outs (B5 and B6). On the next play, he'll either score or the inning is over.

Correct. But what if there are numerous batters who bat out of order in an inning?

I guess I'm just really looking for clarification on this note:

When several players bat out of order before discovery is made so that a player's time at bat occurs while he is a runner, such player remains on base, but he is NOT out as a batter.

The answer that "his spot is skipped" is correct.

Change your original play so B3 bats in place of B1 and singles. B2 bats and flies out. B3 is due up, but is on base. His spot is skipped and B4 becomes the correct batter.

Thank you, that makes much more sense. I'll have to read through that rule again later.

Just a minor thought here, but this is only true after B4 takes a pitch. B4 was the correct batter after B2 took a pitch.
________
Medical Marijuana

As soon as B2 took a pitch, it legitimized B3's at bat. Although B2 is up, B4 is the next legal batter. If the defense appeals while B2 is at bat, B2 is replaced with B4 with the current count. If, after B2 makes an out or reaches base and prior to the first pitch to B4 (in this sitch), B2's out is nullified or he is removed from the base path and all other runners return to their last base occupied at the start of B2's at bat. However, if a baserunner advances due to a stolen base, passed ball, balk, that runner gets to keep that base. Once B2's result is nullified, the proper batter is now called out, in this case B4, and B5 is now the next proper batter.

Did I confuse everyone?:eek:

In OBR and NCAA all outs are nullified when the improper batter is successfully appealed. In FED, I believe that any and all outs that were a result of the improper batter's at-bat stay in addition the the proper batter being called out.

Hope this ........... helps.:D

Without the book infront of me, I believe if this is properly appealed, the defensive team has the option of taking the out for batting out of order, or the result of the play. So if there's a double-play at third and second, the defense can choose to take those two outs and keep the batter at first.

Yes, this is very confusing...that's why I'm trying to get it right. I could see this as being something coaches could/would protest.

There is no option once the appeal has been made. If the defense wanted to keep any resulting outs, such as a double play, they should not have appealed. Once the appeal is recognzed, the penalties are enforced. On the same note, the defense cannot "unappeal." I believe the rule states that once the defense appeals or the umpire realizes the infraction, it must be enforced. Same is true if the offense says something. Once they bring a BOO situation to the umpire, corrective action must take place.

The ONLY time a team has an option on a rule violation, is on catcher interference with a batter on a batted ball. And this is only if the BR and all other runners fail to advance one base.

UmpTTS43,

I would agree with your point that once the defense appeals a BOOT, they cannoy "unappeal" it. I believe the offense has no "standing" to appeal a BOOT and that the umpire does nothing, even should he realize a BOOT occurred, until the defense appeals.

Oh, and you've got 50% of the times the offended team has an "option" to take the penalty or the result of the play (under OBR rules).

JM

aschramm,
I see that you highlighted the FED part. You may be correct in saying that the defense can choose. I do not know.

CoachJM,
I agree that the offense has no "standing" in calling BOO. By rule, once the umpire realizes the infraction, he should enforce it. When I have had this situation, I have told the offensive coach, no you cannot .... This usually will key off the defense for the appeal. I, personally, would not enforce the BOO if the defense did not appeal.

What did I miss JM on the option thingy? Can't I always be right?:D

Yep, sorry if I didn't point that out. I'm just looking for FED rule references. Thanks!!

TTUmp,

The difference in FED is that even if the defense does properly appeal a BOOT, any outs made on the play stand and only advances due to the improper batter's completion of his at bat are nullified. Under OBR & NCAA, both outs and advances are nullified.

So, in FED, if an improper batter hits into a double play, the 2 outs stand, and any advances are "reset". Under OBR & NCAA, the 2 outs on the play would be "replaced" by the one out declared on the proper batter. In FED, you kinf of get to "have your cake and eat it too".

For the other OBR "manager's option", see the oft-overlooked 8.02(a) Penalty.

Oh, and there's yet another "manager's option" in FED that does not exist in OBR.

JM

Oooh yes, the ol' 8.02(a) penalty. And I get to use that one so often. If I ever had a coach take the option on that one, I'd kiss his cleats. Thanks for the reminder.

Enlighten me on FED, since I rarely have to go there.