Two Pitching Changes Spark Protest

[jicecone]

3.05C is referring to a substitution of a pitcher that is in the game and has not fulfilled the pitching to a batter rule. This not about substituting for a pitcher that is not yet ofiicially in the game. Which is what happened and is the subject of discussion.

Was the lefty warming up considered officially in the game because he was warming up or announced/indicated as the next pitcher? That is the question here.

[pob14]

Originally Posted by jicecone

Was the lefty warming up considered officially in the game because he was warming up or announced/indicated as the next pitcher? That is the question here.

That's what I thought 3.08(a)(1) answered. You know a lot more about this than I do, jicecone, so I'm sure I'm wrong; what am I missing here?

[jicecone]

Actually I still have some research to do myself. And thats is why I say it is not as clear as it reads.

[MD Longhorn]

The rule you referenced is for an unannounced sub. You don't need that rule for a sub that IS announced.

For those wondering whether he was announced or not, check the box score. He is in there (Wright). He would not have been allowed to pitch later. It's very clear he was announced and substituted for before throwing any pitches (the box even shows him with a 0 pitch count).

[jicecone]

Then the rules state that "once the improper pitcher delivers a pitch he becomes the proper pitcher".

It sounds like the umpire is supposed to prevent this however, there is no penalty, and if the coach wants to substitute a new picther , then he becomes legal after the first pitch.

Yes I agree that Wright was not eligibie to return to the game.

[bluehair]

Originally Posted by jicecone

Then the rules state that "once the improper pitcher delivers a pitch he becomes the proper pitcher".

This may apply for when the game isn't protested or the protest becomes moot, but this is no defense for the protest.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by jicecone

Then the rules state that "once the improper pitcher delivers a pitch he becomes the proper pitcher".

All that's saying is that if you don't catch it, and they start pitching, they are no longer improper.

There's no mechanism in the rules to legally and knowingly allow what happened to happen, other than injury - which didn't happen.

[David B]

Was just reading this on ESPN.com and they said MLB said it was done incorrectly. Wow, 2 big mistakes in two days - so much for all the umpire conferences these days - they don't seem to be producing the correct rulings ..

Thanks
David

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

All that's saying is that if you don't catch it, and they start pitching, they are no longer improper.

There's no mechanism in the rules to legally and knowingly allow what happened to happen, other than injury - which didn't happen.

And besides "the umpire shall direct the proper pitcher to return to the game until the provisions of this rule are fulfilled."(3.05C) and "the umpire shall notify the manager of the offending club that it cannot be done" in (3.05C Comment), what is the penalty for doing it?

None that I can see. Eject the manager, the pitcher that you didn't want to pitch anyway?

That is what I am trying to figure out.