Runners Swap
 

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?

I have an umpire who is asleep for putting the ball in play (or allowing his partner to do so). It should have been 3 ejections and an out for passing (maybe the out is a bit of a stretch but I like the idea).

I said same about the umpires and then questioner asked what if they were d*mn near twins, so back to subject....

I will comment later what I said.

I still have 3 EJs. Did they forget which base they were on? Zero tolerance for that juvenile stuff.

Always look at the number of the lead runner if there are only two on base.

Now...your question asked...what do you have...what you have is a mess...that I'm not sure you can get out of...remember, the other coach didn't catch it either.

If you can write incident reports in your FED state, I would certainly do that under sportsmanship and they could be reprimanded by the state.

I'm not sure if FED allows you to go back and "fix" anything like that for not catching it when it should've been caught.

*you means the hypothetical "you" that we all use...not intended to be YOU personally.

If you notice it after the swap occurs (as you should) and before the pitch, do you eject the runners and manager under 9.01 (d) or do you call the runners out under and
or are there other pertainant rules I need to reference?
Also, are you ejecting the runners or simply calling them out, or both?

This is a blatent attempt to circumvent the rules to gain an advantage, in other words --CHEATING. I will implement the most severe penalty I can, and that would be to call the lead runner out for passing and call the trail runner out for running the bases in reverse order. And I dare a coach who just tried to cheat to come out and argue with me. He will be in the parking lot very quickly.

Try this on for size:

8-2-3 affirms that a runner who misses a base while advancing may not return to touch it after a following runner has scored. A proper appeal did occur. The batter hit the first pitch and the coach informed you that the proper runners were not on their bases. If you have a partner, confer. If not, you messed up by making the ball live but the appeal does not have to happen before the pitch. Yes, the defensive coach was sleeping but is not expected to look for deception on teh part of the other team. That is your job.

3-3-1g (4) - A coach, player, substitute or other bench personnel shall not commit any unsportsmanlinke act to include, but not limited to, behavior in any manner not in accordance with the spirit of fair play.

At minimum, you have two ejections. Neither runner can deny that they didn't know where they should be at the start of the play. The coach should be dumped if you believe he was aware or instigated the deception. This isn't a court of law, you simply have to believe he conspired.

It is a stretch but you are also able to forfeit the game under 4-4-1d, since the team's deception was done in order to end the game. Let the state deal with the protest. Document the matter correctly and the head coach won't have a leg to stand on for the protest.

I welcome any feedback about these thoughts.

There's a FED interp to the effect that you call R1 out for passing, R2 out for running the bases in reverse and EJ the coach.

Agreed but that doesn't penalize the players for knowingly participating in a play that betrays fair play. Dump them all after calling the outs. The money we make isn't enough for dealing with this LL stuff. Forfeit the game and let the state, conference, league handle the coach and players.

As another wrote, look at the numbers, not the faces. When I log a conference, I note who is at bat and on base. That way a coach cannot tell me that he still has a conference or two left to burn. It's a good habit that takes ten seconds to record and saves the day when this happens.

3 EJs and two outs is a penalty that fits the crime. And I won't listen to anyone except the new head coach, and I won't talk to him until the ejectees are out of sight and sound (the clock is running).

2011 BRD number 427.

Now what do you do with the play that happened before the discovery?

Undo it. The inning ended before the batter did anything.

What is the play?

Dash has it right....... This is the only way that the situation should end.... 2 out, 3 ejections (both runners & the OC). Just make damn sure you are correct as to who was where. Go to the score books if you have to but once you find it, you get 3 EJ's and that's all there is to it.

In the OP, did either runner miss a base?

My initial reaction was that the coach should be auto-dumped; we need to hold him accountable for this kind of cheating regardless of whether he was aware of or instigated it.

You asked what do I got?

A lot of paperwork at the least. Minimum 3 ejs and will look for more.

If the runners chose to swap bases then they would not be touching them in their rightful order.

As stated, I wuld probably have three ejections but would make it easy on myself. I can almost guarantee that when I explain to the coach why I just ejected both players after calling them out, he'll behave in a way that will easily demonstrate whether he was complicit or not. Chances are that he was but I have kids and know how to read body language pretty well by now. ;)

Ever seen a player disobey a coach (stealing when told not to, throwing at a batter, taking out a fielder on a slide, etc.)? I have and it's pretty funny to see the coach implode.

Ok, I see I was not clear on what I was asking so let me rephrase.

Bottom 7th, tie game, 0 outs.

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.

I think we established two outs per FED interp, and some ejections (opinions vary on how many).

Now what do you do with the base hit that happened before the discovery?

I was at the clinic monday night when this was asked and we had some excellent discussion about what to do about this.

Initially, after some hesitation since the pitch had already been thrown, we were convinced that we had one out for the runner passing another runner. If the umpires don't see it before the pitch is thrown, and the game is allowed to continue with no penalty, then it's the lady scorekeeper who will likely catch it when they cross the plate so then what are you going to do?

Getting two outs because you also have the runner running the bases backwards (that is if he did run back to first and you saw it) seems to clean everything up but it wasn't something anyone had said as a solution that night. The three ejections described in this thread went way beyond what any of us had mentioned but that should effectively put an end to anyone else trying such a thing and making a travesty out of the game. The two outs might adequately serve the same purpose though just as we would do on an interference for a double play when no one would need to be tossed. Though no one could argue tossing them, this may be a decision the federation may need to decide on what is best in such a situation.

The hit in my view stands just as it would when someone bats out of order and the next pitch is thrown.

If the swap occured without notice of the umpire and the #3 batter (Charles) scores while the #2 batter (Baker) is still on third, the the only reasonable conclusion would be that Charles passed Baker while running the bases. Call Charles out via 7.08(h). If still less than 3 outs, leave Baker where he's at. Leave Batter where he's at. Eject Charles and Coach when they start arguing with you.

It's also a reasonable conclusion that Charles and Baker batted out of order without being discovered. You would have to know with certainty the order Baker and Charles came to bat.

If I were convinced the players had switched positions on the bases, I definitely agree with dumping the players and the coach. I don't particularly care if the coach knows what's going on as he has a duty to prevent this stuff. That might vary depending on the coach's reputation though. (A coach that's know to be squeaky clean probably get the benefit of the doubt from me.)

I have a harder time with the outs, even if I like the idea of throwing every thing we can at them. How can we consider movement during a defensive conference to be running the bases (in either direction)? Are we going to start calling the trail runner out if he gets over to the third base coach first or stays longer than the lead runner?

Two outs may be the just solution, but I think it has dubious support in the rules.

I tossed this play around with a few umpire friends last night. One of the issues we considered is what is the appeal. I believe that the coach would be correct in appealing the RUNNING OF THE BASES, not the placement of the runners pre-pitch. In that instance, the runners did not touch the bases in their proper order, having swapped their original position. As time had been granted for the conference, both runners cannot move from their base unless a base award is granted. That did not happen. The pitch to the batter only began the appealable play.

As for the batter, I leave him on base because without his being there, the penalty for incorrectly running the bases is irrelevant. The B/R did nothing wrong. We have two outs, a runner on first. The two runners are ejected and depending on coach complicity, he may be as well. If the team cannot field the appropriate amount of players, we have a forefeit. Further, if you dump the coach because he ordered the swap, you can forefeit the game under 4-4-1d.

Great question! I hope someone can ask Fed for their take so that we can debate some more.

I don't think the next pitch legalizes blatant cheating like this. Any runner who is on the wrong base following a conference is going to be out, either for passing or running the bases in reverse. They will also be EJed along with any coach who participated in the conference. The batter didn't cheat so I'll let his at-bat stand.

I'm going to do my level best to enforce a penalty - within the rules - that sticks it as far up the O's butt as I can reach.

Bring on the protest. I can hardly wait.

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.

The coach has a duty to supervise his runners and a responsibility for their on-field behavior. If he didn't tell them to switch places, he negligently allowed it. He's not entitled to the benefit of any doubt if this happens, and he's ejected in my game.

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.

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.

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.

Gramps,
Originally this was a discussion from a Fed clinic and the rules most of us are citing are NFHS. In OBR, NCAA and Fed, a runner cannot legally obtain a base different than his position, unless through a base award when time has been called. In addition, these bases were not unoccupied. Therefore, 7.01 does not apply, right?

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?

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.

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

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.

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

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

Do you eject the coach?

Why would I need to? You did.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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?

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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.