No, My God after 10 days and 4 pages, you'd think you would get it RIGHT!

In BOO, runners that advanced due to the out of order batter return to their bases TOP.

• Runner steals while at incorrect batter is up - stays where he ends up
• Runner forced to advance when the incorrect batter gets on base - return to base TOP

Unless this polar vortex has affected my thinking, I don't see anything wrong what he wrote, given the caveat I highlighted.

Edited to add: Oh wait, my brain IS frozen. I didn't read any of the previous postings. Perhaps I'm wrong after all...

He said THIS: Red part very wrong.

Once a pitch to an illegal batter makes him a batter-runner, any and all advances as a result of that pitch are negated. If ball 4 is wild and nonforced runners advance, they must go back upon proper appeal. Same is true if ball 4 were to go out of play. Runners awarded one base but would return upon proper appeal.

Concerning OBR, J/R is once again wrong.

Concerning OBR, this statement is 100% correct.

Okay, now I'm really confused. Forgive me if this is already covered in one of the previous posts, but I like case plays. So let's play. Please answer under OBR, FED and NCAA.

Sitch: Runner on second base only, improper batter has a 3-2 count with one out. The next pitch is:

1. Ball four that is caught by the catcher. The runner attempts to steal third and is successful. Does he stay at third after the BOO appeal?

2. Ball four that is caught by the catcher. The runner attempts to steal third and is thrown out. Does the out stand after the BOO appeal?

3. Ball four that is caught by the catcher. The catcher sees that the runner is too far off second base, and attempts to pick him off. The pickoff is successful. Does the out stand after the BOO appeal?

4. Ball four that is caught by the catcher. The catcher sees that the runner is too far off second base, and attempts to pick him off. The ball sails into centerfield, and the runner makes it safely to third base. Does he stay at third after the BOO appeal?

5. Ball four that is caught by the catcher. The catcher sees that the runner is too far off second base, and attempts to pick him off. The ball sails into centerfield, but the centerfielder throws out the runner at third base. Does the out stand after the BOO appeal?

6. Ball four (or uncaught strike three) that eludes the catcher. The runner at second makes it easily to third base. Does the runner stay at third after the BOO appeal?

7. Ball four (or uncaught strike three) that eludes the catcher. The runner attempts to advance all the way home as the catcher looks for the ball. The catcher eventually finds the ball, and is able to throw out the runner at home. Does the out stand after the appeal?

Once you answer this question then the rest falls into place.

Did the advancements and/or outs occur while the improper player was a batter or a batter runner?

If the former, then advancements and outs stand. If the latter, both advancements and outs are nullified and the runners are returned to base at time of pitch.

Not true in FED.

To the best of my knowledge, there was consideration of allowing advancements made in certain instances. That list of advancements made such as the ones offered by Manny became too cumbersome so they elected to stay with the rule as it is written.

That's boiling it down to Strunk & White simple. Good job.

Good job? It was expressed simply, but UmpTTS43's opinion does not square with the MLBUM, nor OBR rule 6.07B, nor of course with JR.

I couldn't find anything in the MLBUM that contradicts TTS43's take on 6.07(b). Could you enlighten me please?

Conversely, I don't find anything in the MLBUM (see 3.2) that contradicts OBR 6.07(b). And UmpTTS43's "take" is simply wrong. Here's the rule:
(b) When an improper batter becomes a runner or is put out, and the defensive team appeals to the umpire before the first pitch to the next batter of either team, or before any play or attempted play, the umpire shall (1) declare the proper batter out; and (2) nullify any advance or score made because of a ball batted by the improper batter or because of the improper batter’s advance to first base on a hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batter or otherwise.
For example, when an improper batter takes ball 4 on a wild pitch, and R2 goes to third base, R2's advance to third is not caused by the batter reaching first-- it was caused by the wild pitch. He gets to keep the advance.

I hope no one will contend that the rulemakers went to the trouble of writing "nullify any advance or score made because of a ball batted by the improper batter or because of the improper batter’s advance to first base on a hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batter or otherwise even though they really meant "nullify any advance made when the improper batter became a runner."

WOW! 5 pages of discussion on a simple batting out of order question.

This board is becoming pathetic!

Some have already contended just that. I was at a clinic today and asked Rob Drake and Lance Barrett about this. Both said that when an improper batter becomes a runner and is properly appealed, all advances and outs are nullified.

Interesting. Thanks!

Judging by your recent posting history, I don't think it's the board's issue.