OBR 3.06 & 3.07 vs 3.08
 

3.06 & 3.07 are very clear and understandable. But, 3.08 seems to say there is no penalty for violating 3.06. I would like for some more senior umpires weigh in on this.

We had a specific situation in a Cal Ripkin 10U tournament this weekend where a substitute batter was reported to the umpire and consequently reported to the official scorer by the umpire, but when his place came up in the batting order, the original starter batted instead of the substitute. Since (at least in Ripkin Ball) that batter (the starting batter) would have been able to re-enter legally, was this a violation or simply an unreported substitution that would be covered by 3.08 (a2).

I can't tell you about Cal Ripken rules. In OBR, if a coach told me "12 for 24" and then I saw 24 immediately come to the plate, I'd stop the game and ask about it. He'd either send 12 up or withdraw the sub. I don't really care which, and I certainly won't insist (contrary to the rules) that 12 has entered the game unless he actually enters the game.

I've never seen anything like that, but then again I don't work 10U. I frankly don't know why any umpire would fret about subs at that level.

If it's a legal reentry...I would consider it an unreported sub...unless I missed something when I read it I'm assuming that the subs are in the correct places and minus "reporting" the reentry, everything else would be legal.

Would the situation in the OP, in your opinion, be considered an improper batter and thus covered by rule 6.07 or is this a completely different animal? Keep in mind, the batter did resume his rightful place in the batting order.

An improper batter has to be in the lineup already.

When someone not in the lineup (in this case, the original starter) bats in place of someone, it is an issue of substitution.

It's an unreported sub. If y'all don't do youth ball and understand that re-entry is legal then butt out.

First of all, the batting substitution should not be accepted from the mgr until the new batter is actually coming to bat. It sounds like a "projected substitution" occcured since you say "when his place came up in the batting order". Unlike a pitcher, who must pitch to one batter or side retired while he is pitching, a batter does not have to complete an at bat, he could be substitute for while at bat, or after he is announced. So if sub is announced and original starter bats it seems to me that the mgr just burned a sub, without making an appearance, since the original starter can re-enter, unannounced, which is not legal, but there is no penalty for it. In CR there are no minimum participation requirements so burning a sub is not illegal.

If umpire will only accept offensive subs when they occur this will not be so likely.

???

+1

Reason #729 not to accept projected substitutions.

I don't see anyone who hasn't understood that, and whether re-entry ios legal or not, the OP is an issue of substitution, not of BOOT.

So what I'm getting from all the comments is that:
A) even though 3.06 was violated, 3.08 says there is no actual penalty.
B) maybe the umpire could have been more vigilant on when to accept the substitutions from the manager.
C) as long as nobody is BOOT, play on.

I got into it with a team last year about a legal unreported sub.

I said, that "yes, they should've told me" but there's no penalty if they don't and it's legal.

Yes, but remember that a substitute has been burned without actually participating.