BOO ruling in Dizzy Dean

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

If you're in a rule set where you cannot pre-announce subs then when the PH stepped into the box he became an unannounced sub for B8 and legally in the 8 slot..

I don't think the PH was an "unnanounced" sub. He, as I read it, reported to the PU, who made the notation on the line-up card (edit: after re-reading the OP, I see no indication of whether there was a line-up card or notation.). That makes him a sub for whomever he reported.

The pU screwed up by not announcing this to the defense, so they didn't know what was going on.

[yawetag]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I don't think the PH was an "unnanounced" sub. He, as I read it, reported to the PU, who made the notation on the line-up card (edit: after re-reading the OP, I see no indication of whether there was a line-up card or notation.). That makes him a sub for whomever he reported.

The pU screwed up by not announcing this to the defense, so they didn't know what was going on.

Exactly. Say the players were using uniform numbers 1-9 to designate their batting spot. #8 should be due up, but #10 walks up; coach yells "Blue, #10 batting for #9!"

I mark the change on my card, then tell the defense, saying "#10 batting for #9 in the 9-hole." At this point, #10 is in the box, batting for #9. Even though #8 should be in the box, then we've got a simple BOO at this point. Because defense didn't notice it until B1 was hitting, that's not my fault.

Last I checked, it wasn't my job to ensure teams were following their batting order, and I don't check that the batter being changed is supposed to be the next batter -- it's offense and defense's jobs to make sure they're being followed.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I don't think the PH was an "unnanounced" sub. He, as I read it, reported to the PU, who made the notation on the line-up card (edit: after re-reading the OP, I see no indication of whether there was a line-up card or notation.). That makes him a sub for whomever he reported.

The pU screwed up by not announcing this to the defense, so they didn't know what was going on.

My point was that if he was approaching the plate as B8 was due up he can announce all he wants that he's batting for B9 but if you cannot pre-announce subs then he can't legally announce he's batting for B9. Therefore as he steps into the box he's an unannounced bub for B8.

[greymule]

"I recall one where a coach was caught not playing a child who was not very talented. He walked in a run in order to avoid a slaughter rule just so the kid could bat in the fifth inning."

If I'm reading this correctly, I don't see where the coach is some sort of villain. I assume that the league requires that every kid play in the game (and bat). So the coach could have been planning to play the less-talented kid from the fifth inning on but then became faced with a shortened (4-inning) game, so he extended it to get the kid in. Yes, it's ridiculous that he had to walk in a run to prolong the game and satisfy the rule, but should a coach have to play every kid in the first few innings just in case the mercy rule shortens the game?