NFHS Only (please)

[PeteBooth]

[QUOTE=UmpJM (nee CoachJM);671793]

As others have said, I would clarify with the head coach which player was batting and which was fielding, and I always say "in the X hole". He verifies, I annotate.

It would not occur to me to have the coach "redo" or "correct" his lineup due to this (i.e., unorthodox placement of the DH), nor would I mention it to him.

There is no rule that specifies "how" the lineup card is to be filled out. I understand that Tim has helped establish a standard in Oregon that may have the effect of "rule" there.

Where I work that is not the case. And this is the last thing I want to get "pissy" about at the plate conference.

JM nothing to do with being "pissy"

You get those games where the coach is making multiple changes. Now you have "arrows" all over the line-up card and an ineligable player or BOO question arises and now you have to figure out which arrow goes where.

It's much easier to have the DH right below the player he is batting for so there is NO confusion ESPECIALLY with multiple changes. When the DH is subbed you simply have the coach insert the new player where the DH was and so on an so forth.

If the DH is listed 10th and then subbed for you now have a "new arrow" to deal with. then there is re-entry etc. etc.

There should be no "guess" work when it comes to the line-up and IMO it's not being "pissy" when you tell the coach to put the DH below the player he is batting for. It takes all of 1 or 2 minutes if that. Also, the opposing coach wants to receive a line-up with no questions either.

REAL answer as with many of these type OP's. Discuss at one's local umpire association so that ALL umpires are on the same page.

What you don't want which pisses the coaches off is for say Tee or me to go to a game, ask the coach to insert the DH underneath the player he is batting for and the coach say "Pete you are the first umpire who has mentioned this to me all year"

Pete Booth