Please Help with DH Rule
 

I have run into this situation several times and I know the rule, but I get many different interpretations from different umpires. It involves the DH (FED). I know that the DH and the person who he is batting for are both starters and have re-enter privileges. Here are a couple of situatuons I have had.

Situation #1
#2 Mais is the DH and he is batting for #16 Clevenger who is playing second base. Mais reaches base in the 4th inning. Clevenger enters to pinch run for Mais. I understand that at this point Mais' role as the DH is terminated. Some coaches (and even some umpires) tell me that Mais is finished for the game. I disagree because he is a starter and can re-enter. After the half inning is complete, Clevenger goes back into the field as the second baseman. When the spot comes back up in the order in the 6th inning, Mais re-enters as a pinch-hitter for Clevenger. This is Clevenger's first time out of the game. This is Mais' one re-entry for the game. After the half inning is over, Clevenger re-enters for Mais and plays second base. At this point Mais is finished for the game.

Situation #2
#2 Mais is the DH for #16 Clevenger who is playing second base. Mais reaches base in the 4th inning and #12 Smith pinch runs for Mais. After the half inning is over, Clevenger stays in the game at second base. In the 6th inning when the spot comes back up, Mais bats as a pinch-hitter. The opposing coach does not want Mais to be allowed back into the game. When he is told that this is legal, he then wants Clevenger removed from the game. At this point, I think the umpire understands until he tells the coach that since Mais had left for a pinch-runner he can re-enter. He goes on to say that if he had been removed for a pinch-hitter, he would not be allowed to re-enter.

I do understand that the DH and the person he is hitting for cannot be in the field at the same time.

Any help with how to deal with this when opposing coaches and sometimes even umpires don't understand the rule would be greatly appreciated.

You are correct in both situations.

I find it helpful to use phrases like "role of the DH" and "the player", as you seem to do. Or you could try having them read the case plays (3.1.4C is about the same as your first scenario).

SOmetimes though, you just need to remember that you can lead a horse to water, but you can't teach an old dog to make a silk purse out of a pig-in-a-poke.

Sit. 1. I agree with this.

Sit 2. If Mais bats as a pinch hitter for Clavinger then there is no problem. He is allowed to reenter because he is a starter. But he is not the DH because that ended when a pinch runner came in for him.

Wrong.

Mais was the starting DH.

Then, the pinch runner became the DH.

Then, Mais reentered, still to be the DH. None of the criteria for removing the role of the DH was met.

jicecone,

The only time putting in a pinch runner for a DH who has reached base would terminate the DH role is if the pinch runner was the defensive player he was batting for.

JM

The way I think of this: having a DH splits the offensive and defensive roles of one spot in the lineup between 2 players. If the DH plays defense or the defensive player bats -- switching roles -- the role of the DH is terminated.

Substitutions of any kind (pinch hitting, running, etc.) do not terminate the role of the DH.

Michael,

Fixed if for you.

John

Correct, I blew it.

My main point was it had to be for Clavinger which I thought was not clear until I just read it again. They are both locked into same spot in the batting order.

Last Friday night I had 4 guys play in the 2 slots, defensive player and DH, and one of them was a courtesy runner for the catcher earlier in the game. In each case the Mgr asked me if he could make the change he wanted to make and each I said yes. I wrote down every change in my notepad. If you don't write this stuff down as it happens you will get hopelessly lost.

In another game last week, there were only 3 players involved, and the opposing coach wanted to claim BOO, and then after I explained what the other team had done he wanted to claim illegal substitution and protest the game (which is not allowed). It was a really simple case and he could not grasp.