Runners Swap

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

My apologies but which way is it? You stated that you don't care if the coach is complicit or not but then how you would consider his reputation in deciding his fate.

I'm not clear on what you are advocating.

I said I don't particularly care. In other words, I don't always care whether the coach is complicit. I can see a situation where I'm 100% confident the coach wasn't involved. In that situation, I wouldn't dump the coach.

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

I disagree.

Using this logic, a coach should be ejected when a player bats out of order too.

Please cite the rule that demands a coach be punished for negligence with regards to either situation.

-----------------------------------------------------------

I have seen players disregard directives of their coaches. From stealing or bunting when the score is already out of hand to blatant collisions when a coach is instructing the player to slide (bad blood between players, in this sitch), this occurs.

I have also seen players use equipment that is illegal. In at least one instance, the player attempted to use a bat that had been removed from the game. Do you eject the coach because the player tried to use a -10 bat? The coach afformed that all players were properly equipped during the plate meeting. Is he negligent because his player CHOSE to do something that is illegal? BTW, the penalty for using an illegal bat is an out, not player ejection.

I welcome discussion and know that I have been incorrect many times before. My wife reminds me daily.

There's a big difference between this and batting out of order. Batting out of order is a legitimate, but risky, tactic that is provided by and for in the rules. Quite frankly, I'm surprised it isn't attempted more often in lower level games where the opponents may not be as vigilant about the batting order.

Originally Posted by Gramps

Look at the last sentence in 7.01

7.01 -- A runner acquires the right to an unoccupied base when that runner touches it before being put out. The runner is then entitled to it until put out or forced to vacate it for another runner legally entitled to that base. If a runner legally acquires title to a base, and the pitcher assumes his/her pitching position, the runner may not return to a previously occupied base.

This is an automatic out according to J/R.

I'm not an OBR ump so I don't have J/R. Does it mention specifically returning during a dead ball period or just returning in general?

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Batting out of order and using an illegal bat are not the same order of cheating, are much more common, and have rules specifically addressed to them. These facts all tell against your inference that my ruling applies equally to them.

Not every possible act of cheating is addressed in the rules. Sometimes you just gotta umpire. I'm not telling you how to run your games, just reporting what I would do. And my approach seems consistent with the respected voices of this forum.

First of all, I have maintained that I would eject a coach who was complicit in committing such a deceptive act. I have cited rules to support this. You have not.

Extending your belief, a coach should be ejected if his player knowingly bats out of order in an attempt to cheat and he is unaware of the deception.

I provided another example of what the rule states regarding use of an illegal bat - one used solely to cheat. This time, I even added the fact that the coach agreed that his players were properly equipped. Still, the rule says differently - a coach is not ejected, nor is the player!

My ruling has never once disagreed with 'the respected voices of this forum'. I only disagreed with your assertion that a coach be held liable for negligence. Cite the rule and I will happily concur. Until then, I respectfully disagree with your belief.

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I said I don't particularly care. In other words, I don't always care whether the coach is complicit. I can see a situation where I'm 100% confident the coach wasn't involved. In that situation, I wouldn't dump the coach.

Thanks, Eastshire. I agree that establishing intent is proper.

There's a big difference between this and batting out of order. Batting out of order is a legitimate, but risky, tactic that is provided by and for in the rules. Quite frankly, I'm surprised it isn't attempted more often in lower level games where the opponents may not be as vigilant about the batting order.

Not really. Intentionally placing an improper, good hitter at the plate is deceptive and the coach should be punished. Again, we fall back on establishing whether the coach should be held liable for a player doing this of his own volition. I don't see this happening in a Varsity game but in lower levels you are right, this is ripe for the picking. Thanks for the thoughts. I love this discussion!

Have a good season.

[MikeStrybel]

I emailed this question and the follwing debate to a friend and he responded with this:

It's a tie game and a slow catcher leads off the bottom of the last with a double. There (sic) coach requests time and yells for a courtesy runner. The defensive team requests a conference at the same time. The catcher jogs by the coach who congratulates him with some kind words. The stadium and dugout is going crazy. The defensive coach concludes his trip to the mound and you signal the ball back in. The first pitch is roped and the runner scores. As the defensive team slinks off the field there (sic) head coach notices that the runner had already been a courtesy runner for the pitcher.

According to him, this play happened last year in a playoff game he worked.

Do you eject the coach?

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

First of all, I have maintained that I would eject a coach who was complicit in committing such a deceptive act. I have cited rules to support this. You have not.

Why would I need to? You did.

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

Extending your belief, a coach should be ejected if his player knowingly bats out of order in an attempt to cheat and he is unaware of the deception.

I provided another example of what the rule states regarding use of an illegal bat - one used solely to cheat. This time, I even added the fact that the coach agreed that his players were properly equipped. Still, the rule says differently - a coach is not ejected, nor is the player!

I've already explained why your "extension" of my claim is illegitimate.

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

My ruling has never once disagreed with 'the respected voices of this forum'. I only disagreed with your assertion that a coach be held liable for negligence. Cite the rule and I will happily concur. Until then, I respectfully disagree with your belief.

As you know, the rules do not address every possible transgression. I don't imagine that you will allow the defense to dig a moat around 2nd base and fill it with wine, but you can't point to a provision of the rules that specifically prohibits that act.

I respect your respectful disagreement. I've been reporting what I would do and why, so I'm not really trying to persuade you.

[DBull]

Originally Posted by DG

I was just asked this question. It came from a FED clinic but same could happen under OBR.

Bottom 7th, tie game, 2 outs, although I don't think that matters.

Batter hits a double, he is a slow runner. Next batter is fastest player on the team and he is intentional walked. Defensive coach goes to mound to talk with defense. Offensive coach calls runners over for discussion. When play resumes slow runner is on first and fast runner is on second. Batter hits first pitch for a hit, fast runner scores. Defensive coach comes out to complain that runners swapped.

What you got?

This post really gets things going. There does not seem to be any direct reference in the FED r OBR books, but it is directly referenced in the ASA Softball rule book. Seems that this was a pretty common ploy used in some SB games in the past. Both runners called out and Coach ejected.

[Gramps]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I said I don't particularly care. In other words, I don't always care whether the coach is complicit. I can see a situation where I'm 100% confident the coach wasn't involved. In that situation, I wouldn't dump the coach.



There's a big difference between this and batting out of order. Batting out of order is a legitimate, but risky, tactic that is provided by and for in the rules. Quite frankly, I'm surprised it isn't attempted more often in lower level games where the opponents may not be as vigilant about the batting order.



I'm not an OBR ump so I don't have J/R. Does it mention specifically returning during a dead ball period or just returning in general?

The ball has to be live with the pitcher on the pitching rubber in order for this to apply. Example: R1, no outs. Batter swings and misses with F2 dropping the ball. R1 is stealing on the play and continues to 2nd. F2 get the ball tosses it back to F1 before he realizes that R1 is at second. F1 and R1 both think the ball was foul, but the plate umpire did not signal such. F1 is standing on the rubber with the ball getting ready for his next pitch when R1 (now R2) heads back to 1st because he thought he was required to on a foul ball. As soon as R1 touches 1st again he is out by rule 7.01.

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Why would I need to? You did.

Yes, I provided a rule that states that you may not eject a coach due to perceived negligence. I asked you to show me where that penalty is in the rule book for coach negligence with regards to players being deceitful. I still await that citation.

I've already explained why your "extension" of my claim is illegitimate.

No, you simply said that it is. The rule book doesn't support your belief.

As you know, the rules do not address every possible transgression. I don't imagine that you will allow the defense to dig a moat around 2nd base and fill it with wine, but you can't point to a provision of the rules that specifically prohibits that act.

Wow. I asked for you to supply a rule that shows a coach is subject to ejection for being negligent to the actions of his team. I gave two pertinent examples - a player attempts to cheat by batting out of order and another who uses illegal equipment. Neither qualifies as an ejection for the player OR the coach. That is what the rule book states. No, we don't have to have every possible infraction itemized but I have yet to find a rule, note, penalty, A.R., point of emphasis or other statement that suggests that a coach is subject to ejection for things beyond his control.

I also provided another play that actually occurred in a high school playoff game last year. I ask you again, would you dump the coach for that specific infraction?

I respect your respectful disagreement. I've been reporting what I would do and why, so I'm not really trying to persuade you.

My posts have been consistent - establish guilt and apply the proper penalty.
You implied that others who were respected voices here disagreed with me but that is not the case. Please don't do that. Thank you. I wish you a safe and pleasant baseball season.

[justanotherblue]

Since this is a fed discussion, I would use 3-3-1.4 Penalty. They're cheating period and well aware of it.

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by justanotherblue

Since this is a fed discussion, I would use 3-3-1.4 Penalty. They're cheating period and well aware of it.

Thanks. I cited that earlier.

This isn't a contest. I enjoy discussing plays and the things that can and do go wrong in our games. Thank you for reminding us of the rule we can use once guilt is established. Good luck this season. We still have snow on the ground here but it won't be long.

[justanotherblue]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

Thanks. I cited that earlier.

....... Good luck this season. We still have snow on the ground here but it won't be long.

I'm in the Sierra's, I know snow!! Three feet in my front yard, and losing games because of it.

[robbie]

Originally Posted by DBull

This post really gets things going. There does not seem to be any direct reference in the FED r OBR books, but it is directly referenced in the ASA Softball rule book. Seems that this was a pretty common ploy used in some SB games in the past. Both runners called out and Coach ejected.

OK - Now a twist.

No outs when the decpetion occurs.
Then B3 makes an out. Then B4 makes an out.
Then B5 gets the hit referenced in the OP.

Ok, so you call both runners out and eject the coach as in the ASA reference above (or both runners out and eject all as many have suggested.)

All ejected parties evacuate and the "new" head coach calmly approaches the U and says:
" Hey Blue, I got a problem with that call. My B2 batted first and then B1 then B3. We were very glad the D did not catch it and appeal, but all that action stands and the proper B5 got a hit. You gotta fix it."

Rut ro, now what??

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by robbie

OK - Now a twist.

No outs when the decpetion occurs.
Then B3 makes an out. Then B4 makes an out.
Then B5 gets the hit referenced in the OP.

Ok, so you call both runners out and eject the coach as in the ASA reference above (or both runners out and eject all as many have suggested.)

All ejected parties evacuate and the "new" head coach calmly approaches the U and says:
" Hey Blue, I got a problem with that call. My B2 batted first and then B1 then B3. We were very glad the D did not catch it and appeal, but all that action stands and the proper B5 got a hit. You gotta fix it."

Rut ro, now what??

You are funny. Really.

[Simply The Best]

Originally Posted by robbie

OK - Now a twist.

No outs when the decpetion occurs.
Then B3 makes an out. Then B4 makes an out.
Then B5 gets the hit referenced in the OP.

Ok, so you call both runners out and eject the coach as in the ASA reference above (or both runners out and eject all as many have suggested.)

All ejected parties evacuate and the "new" head coach calmly approaches the U and says:
" Hey Blue, I got a problem with that call. My B2 batted first and then B1 then B3. We were very glad the D did not catch it and appeal, but all that action stands and the proper B5 got a hit. You gotta fix it."

Rut ro, now what??

You could eject the HC and act like you never heard what he said.

[DG]

Nice discussion, and nice question asked.

When I was first asked I thought an out for passing and a coach ejection for cheating. After the FED ruling was pointed out, I have 2 outs in a FED game, one for passing one for running backwards. I still have on ejection for coach cheating. The players who swapped did what coach told them to do, so I not eject them. I expect players to do what the coach tells them.

For the batted ball, I say let it stand, batter has done nothing wrong. If an out, let it stand, more penalty for the offense. If a hit let it stand. It would only matter if there were no outs because with 1 or 2 outs, the 2 out ruling would end the inning, and the offense is not likely to pull this stunt with no outs anyway, more likely with 2 outs, maybe 1, but who would do this with no outs?. I don't know. This is definitely a situation not covered by rule or case book that I can find.

My third game of season I was on bases, and late in game defense called time and offensive HC coach called runners over from 1st and 2nd. When they went back, I thought, sh*t, I did not look at numbers so have no idea if they swapped (thinking about this sit). Then coach made a sub for runner on 2b and I thought, case closed, why would he swap them and then replace lead runner? But it made me realize I must pay attention to numbers when this happens...

Lesson for all, umpires can prevent this situation from happening.