NFHS Rules, Designated Hitter Rule

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I am interested in how this situation should be handled in a game being played using NFHS Baseball Rules.

Home Team has ten (10) players. Team H has the DH batter for the player in the third (3rd) spot in the batting order. The player in the sixth (6th) spot of the batting order is injured in the top of the second (2nd) inning and can not continue to play.

Is this a situation where the player who is the DH enters the game to play defense and thereby takes a spot in the batting order other that the third spot?

Ladies and gentlemen, answers please.

MTD, Sr.

[Ump153]

The DH is locked into the 3rd spot.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Ump153

The DH is locked into the 3rd spot.

Ump153:

Therefore, you are saying move the player for whom the DH was batting into the sixth (6th) spot in the batting order.

MTD, Sr.

[UmpJM]

MTD, Sr.,

Both the DH and the player for whom he is batting are locked into the same spot in the batting order.

In your sitch, the HT has no eligible substitute for the injured player and must continue with 8. An out is recorded each time the injured player's "slot" comes to bat.

The only "exception" to this is if the player is injured during an at bat in which he reaches base safely. Then, if there are no eligible subs available, the player with the "last batted out" may pinch run for the injured player.

JM

[mbyron]

JM is correct.

A word of further explanation. People get confused about the DH because they think of him as a kind of offensive substitute. That's not right: the DH and the defensive player for whom he bats are both locked into a spot in the lineup, and neither is an eligible substitute.

"A substitute is a player who is eligible to replace another player already in the lineup." (2-36) This definition implies that anyone listed in the lineup is NOT an eligible substitute, and thus may NOT bat in another spot in the order.

FED permits a team to continue with 8 in the lineup when an eligible substitute is not available, as JM points out. That said, I'm fairly confident that around here everyone would expect the umpires to bend the rules a little and allow the DH to bat in the spot vacated by the injured player. You know, "it's for the kids, blue," "aw, let 'em play, blue..." etc. etc.

[dash_riprock]

MTD,

Another way of putting it -- The DH and the player for whom he was batting cannot be in the lineup at the same time.

[DG]

Originally Posted by mbyron

That said, I'm fairly confident that around here everyone would expect the umpires to bend the rules a little and allow the DH to bat in the spot vacated by the injured player. You know, "it's for the kids, blue," "aw, let 'em play, blue..." etc. etc.

Around here no one would expect the umpire to bend the rules. However, I did work a game this year where one team only had 9 to start, one got injured in the first inning. The opposing coach said he would prefer not to have an out called everytime that position came to bat, and we allowed that. Two private schools playing with no conference championship at stake.

[Ump153]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Ump153:

Therefore, you are saying move the player for whom the DH was batting into the sixth (6th) spot in the batting order.

MTD, Sr.

Why would you assume such a thing?

No. The two are locked together. Neither one can bat in another spot in the lineup.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Ump153

Why would you assume such a thing?

No. The two are locked together. Neither one can bat in another spot in the lineup.

Ump153:

I should have ended my sentence with a question (?) mark and not a period (.).

MTD, Sr.

[Ump Rube]

I know that I am a little late to the party on this one (long DH tonight, plus a car on the jogging path near the field made for an interesting night), but here is an idea that I had regarding the DH situation, and I am wondering if this is a valid way of explaining it...

The DH and the player he is batting for are 2 halves of the same "player." They may choose to "overtake" the responsibilities of the other half, but cannot exist separately (as a whole) in the batting order.

Does that seem to cover the situation?