BTW, give the young man credit. In only his 2nd year with us--effectively his second year of umpiring--he made the same call MIB and my colleague Bob Jenkins would have made.

This young man is a player on Lewis University's baseball team (D2), and when he's not playing or practicing, he does games for us. He's also a catcher on Lewis's team, which, if you ask me, is a good thing. Many good umpires were once catchers. Must be all the shots to the head we've taken. :D

This is one of the very few Evans interpretations that I do not agree with. I follow the Roder - J/R interp for this situation.

This is not in response to the OP? Correct?

Would like more info on diff between JEA and J/R. I would be inclined to go with Evans.

Evans is working on his new Annotated...looking forward to that

Did not know but will buy if not arm and a leg cost.

You mean like his old $75 one? :D

If it's in that range, I'm a customer.

Ok let's use an example play:

R1, R2. An illegal sub enters the game and hits a bases clearing double. It is then discovered by the umpires that he is an illegal sub:

Roder's ruling: Call out the illegal sub and eject him. Return R1 and R2. The original player subbed for cannot re-enter.

Evan's ruling: The play stands despite the actions of the illegal sub. Both runs score. The illegal sub is ejected (not called out) and is replaced on base with a new sub.

I'm finding it difficult to understand the rationale behind the J/R interpretation insofar as calling the guy out. Now, maybe because I'm thinking along the lines of an unreported sub, which is different, or maybe because it's just late and I should be in bed. :D

What is Roder's basis for this ruling?

an unreported sub isn't necessarily an illegal sub correct?

True, and I understand the difference. Roder's ruling just seems more like what might be expected in Fed but not in NCAA or OBR. I do know that if you have an illegal sub who, say, improperly pinch runs for someone, when he's discovered he's ejected, but to call someone out as appears to be the recommendation by J/R seems odd.

So let's say you have someone from the bench who's an illegal sub, and he gets a double. If you call him out upon being discovered, how would you make that ruling? If Fred is an illegal sub who batted in the 8th spot for William (who's followed by Simon in the 9th spot), do you rule it a batting out of order? Do you rule William out on an unassisted putout and then have Simon come to bat? Or do you rule Fred out and have Simon come to bat? Interesting questions for OBR interps. here.

I don't think it's BOO unless it's truly BOO...an illegal sub is in X spot in the lineup...if that's illegal, we'd have BOO. We do agree that it's not illegal simply because the sub didn't report...we're talking a previous pinch hitter/runner, some type of DH situation where the DH should be terminated and he hits...something like that...

Don't have OBR w/ me today...will look tonight

Oh, I agree with the notion that it's not BOO. I was just throwing out questions for consideration, that's all. BOO can only be when one batter in the lineup bats in the wrong spot in the order, which we don't have here.

Let's make this illegal sub as follows:

In the 4th inning of an OBR game, Fred batted for William in a straight-up substitution situation. As we know, OBR doesn't allow for re-entry (no home rule exception here, btw), so William's done. In the 7th inning, Fred's supposed to be up, as he was the pinch hitter as stated. However, William comes up and doubles. Now we have an "illegal sub."

Roder's saying call William out and eject him. Evans is saying the double stands but William is ejected. If we follow the J/R ruling, how are we going to "classify" this? That's why I asked those questions above. I'm simply curious to see what the thinking of guys here might be.