OBR 3.06 & 3.07 vs 3.08

[rbmartin]

3.06 The manager shall immediately notify the umpire in chief of any substitution and shall state to the umpire in chief the substitute's place in the batting order. Players for whom substitutions have been made may remain with their team on the bench or may "warm up" pitchers. If a manager substitutes another player for himself, he may continue to direct his team from the bench or the coach's box. Umpires should not permit players for whom substitutes have been made, and who are permitted to remain on the bench, to address any remarks to any opposing player or manager, or to the umpires.

3.07 The umpire in chief, after having been notified, shall immediately announce, or cause to be announced, each substitution.

3.08 (a) If no announcement of a substitution is made, the substitute shall be considered as having entered the game when_

(1) If a pitcher, he takes his place on the pitcher's plate;

(2) If a batter, he takes his place in the batter's box;

(3) If a fielder, he reaches the position usually occupied by the fielder he has replaced, and play commences;

(4) If a runner, he takes the place of the runner he has replaced.

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).

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by rbmartin

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.

[johnnyg08]

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.

[rbmartin]

Originally Posted by mbyron

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.

6.07 (d2)...The umpire shall not direct the attention of any person to the presence in the batter's box of an improper batter.

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.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by rbmartin

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.

[Rich Ives]

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

[DG]

Originally Posted by rbmartin

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).

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.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

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

???

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by DG

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.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

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

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.

[rbmartin]

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.

[johnnyg08]

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.

[DG]

Originally Posted by rbmartin

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.

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