Courtesy Runner

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by DG

Its not BS if you have speedy gonzales on the bench and you want to put him in to replace a "projected" pitcher for next inning. Projected pitcher could "pitch' to one batter and be replaced. Or, never pitch due to injury that comes up during warmups.

Chicanery and thus the rule.

Since the SS was his best pitcher he was likely not pulling one, unless player he wanted to run was much faster (entirely possible). His sub and re-enter was certainly within rules and perhaps smart. I doubt he did it just to get a few more warmups for "projected" pitcher, although SS's are not usually slow afoot.

The BS is that they call it a "projected substitution" but as both players are already in the game it isn't a substitution.

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

The BS is that they call it a "projected substitution" but as both players are already in the game it isn't a substitution.

Then call it a "projected replacement of the pitcher/catcher". Same thing.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by zm1283

Then call it a "projected replacement of the pitcher/catcher". Same thing.

Not really. I think Rich's beef is with the rulebook using the term SUBSTITUTE, when that word has a specific meaning and definition that does not apply in this situation. There are no limits on the number of replacements of the pitcher or catcher... there are limits on substitutes.

[DG]

Most folks know the rule is written to prevent RAT from putting speedy in to run in strategic situation, which was not intenct of courtesy runner rule. Beef is over semantics.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by DG

Most folks know the rule is written to prevent RAT from putting speedy in to run in strategic situation, which was not intenct of courtesy runner rule. Beef is over semantics.

And just who initiates rule changes in FED?

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

And just who initiates rule changes in FED?

Believe it or not, the Rats themselves!