BOT question
 

R2 on 2B, no out. B1 bats out of turn. The defense appeals the BOT to the umpire after B1 reaches first. In each case, does R2 return to second base if

a) He runs to third on a third strike wild pitch?
b) He runs to third on a ball four wild pitch?
c) He steals third on ball four, not wild?

Would it make any difference in cases b or c if R2 were on 1B and ran to second on the pitch?

Another question: In BOT situations, should the umpire ever "help" the offensive team in determining who is the proper batter (even if they ask?)

If the runners advance was NOT as a result of the batter's actions then he keeps the advance.

BOO Question
 

Only if the offense asks.

In each case, does R2 return to second base if:
a) He runs to third on a third strike wild pitch? NO
b) He runs to third on a ball four wild pitch? NO (unless 1st base was occupied)
c) He steals third on ball four, not wild? NO (unless 1st base was occupied)

Would it make any difference in cases b or c if R2 were on 1B and ran to second on the pitch? Yes. since his advance was technically forced due to the batter becoming a runner, his advance would be nullified upon appeal.

MLB 6.07(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.
NOTE: If a runner advances, while the improper batter is at bat, on a stolen base, balk, wild pitch or passed ball, such advance is legal.

Correct. I was referring only to scenarios B & C in which the improper BR recieved a base on balls.

B3 bats instead (and either strikes out or gets a single) of the proper batter B2. A pitch is thrown to the next batter which is B2. The defense appeals BOOT and you tell them that B2 is now the proper batter. B2 finishes his at at bat with either an out or a hit. The offense asks who is the next batter. Do you actually tell them B4 or B3 depending on the sit?

When the proper batter is on base, he is passed over, and the following batter becomes the proper batter.

Rule 6.07 PLAY 6. Daniel walks and Abel comes to bat. Daniel was an improper batter, and if an appeal is made before the first pitch to Abel, Abel is out, Daniel is removed from base, and Baker is the proper batter. There is no appeal, and a pitch is made to Abel. Daniel’s walk is now legalized, and Edward thereby becomes the proper batter. Edward can replace Abel at any time before Abel is put out or becomes a runner. He does not do so. Abel flies out, and Baker comes to bat. Abel was an improper batter, and if an appeal is made before the first pitch to Baker, Edward is out, and the proper batter is Frank. There is no appeal, and a pitch is made to Baker. Abel’s out is now legalized, and the proper batter is Baker. Baker walks. Charles is the proper batter. Charles flies out. Now Daniel is the proper batter, but he is on second base. Who is the proper batter? RULING: The proper batter is Edward. When the proper batter is on base, he is passed over, and the following batter becomes the proper batter.

I do.

They don't bat out of turn. They bat out of order. BOO

OBR 6.07 Batting Out Of Turn

I think I screwed that up. When a pitch was thrown to B2 it legalized B3. So if the defense appeals B2 BOOT then I should swap B2 for B4. If the defense appeals B3 BOOT, let's say if he got a single, I tell them he is legal now that a pitch was thrown. But do we have to have a specific appeal about B2 to swap him out for B4 in this case?

First you had the offense asking, now you have the defense asking.

In general, I'd try to fix the problem entirely once a team says something. In the pros, it might be different.

I had a case several years ago in a Legion game. I was BU. Offensive coach comes out after 1st batter of the inning grounds out. After brief discussion my partner signals 2 outs. I call time to have a discussion with my partner. Seems he got confused. The batter who grounded out was batting out of order, 5th batter in lineup when 4th should have been up. So he was signaling one out for the groundout and one out for the BOO. I tell him no way we can have one batter and two outs. Defensive coach comes out to join the discussion. We tell him we have a BOO situation. He says he is happy with the result and he did not bring it up. Skipping #4 and #5 grounding out seemed to him like a good deal. I tell my partner that since defensive coach did not bring it up, offensive coach did, we we have nothing to enforce.

My point is, if offense asks that don't mean much, unless they ask before the at bat is over.

6.07 BATTING OUT OF TURN.(a) A batter shall be called out, on appeal, when he fails to bat in his proper turn,...

Rule 2.00 (Definitions of Terms). An APPEAL is the act of a fielder in claiming violation of the rules by the offensive team.

Translation: If the fielding team doesn't bring it up, ignore it.

FWIW BOOT can be appealed by anyone on the defensive team. Doesn't have to be a fielder.

Correct

Even if he ran on the pitch?

Do you tell him which batter is called out?

Yes, unless he safely arrived at 2nd before the pitch, he is a forced runner and thus must return to 1st.

Absolutely. And, if asked, you can tell then who should be up next. That's if he asks.

I've had situations where they are just mad, gripe about the rules ("can't the kids just play ball"), the proceed to send up another wrong batter. That's when you, as the umpire, have a choice. You can say, "You need 13 in the box", or just let things go. Depending on how much of a jackass the O manager was, of course.

I understand that viewpoint, for most levels of ball. But if it's lower level, instructional type ball, and the manager asks who should be the proper batter, after a BOOT out, I'll tell him.

Down at the Cal Ripken level, I would probably walk the coach through this issue, but at a High School level, definitely not. If a coach asks , I would probably say something like "your last proper batter was Baker, your lineup card should say who is next". They should know the rules. I wouldn't tell him how to coach properly any more than I would tell a hitter how to hit better.

Just answer the question. If you don't, you'll just be dealing with another BOO appeal (legitimate or not) in a few seconds when he gets in the box, and you'll have to answer it then, anyway.

In all three scenarios the runner must return when the BOO appeal is upheld. The advancement was made while the batter turned into a batter runner. Advancements can only be made while the illegal person up is considered a batter.

The title of the rule is a misnomer, regardless.

It isn't illegal to bat out of turn; it is illegal to fail to bat in turn.

It is B3's turn to bat, but B4 bats. B4 has not committed a violation, but B3 has. Upon proper appeal, B3 is out.

Wrong in all three cases.

What you said is true if the runner is FORCED to advance when the batter becomes a B/R, but R2 isn't forced in any of those situations.

R1, R3, one out. Improper batter B7 receives a base on balls, on which ball 4 is a wild pitch. R1 advances to 2nd and R3 advances to the plate. Defense makes a proper appeal. B7 is out, R1 returns, R3 scores.

R1, R3, one out. Improper batter B7 swings and misses at an uncaught third strike, upon which R1 advances to 2nd and R3 advances to the plate. Defense makes a proper appeal. B7 is out, R1 remains at 2nd, R3 scores.

The proper batter is out, not B7.

Being forced has nothing to do whether a runner has to return or not. If a runner advances when the batter becomes a runner, they must return. The only time advancements stand is when they are made while the illegal player is a batter. The fact that a pitch is a passed ball is irrelevant since that pitch makes the batter a batter runner.

Wrong player out, and the rest is all wrong too. No advances that occur after B becomes BR stand. R3 does not score in either case.

(And now that I say that, the back of my head is tickling me that this might be ruleset specific... where are those books now.... :) )

Here's an email response from Jim Paronto (NCAA) on how to handle it, at least there (the question relates to improper batter, ball4/wild pitch):


You are correct. The advance by R2 was on a wild pitch, which just happened to be ball four. Had it been ball three, he still would have advanced. Leave him at second, call the improper batter out and get the correct hitter to the plate.





Thanks for asking.


Jim

Jim has the wrong guy out as well. Typo?

In NFHS, when the improper batter becomes a runner or is put out, and the BOOT is appealed, all runner return to TOP base. 7.1.2 Penalty 2 (from a 2009 rule book)

In OBR, "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." (6.07, and my bolding for emphasis)

Let's try this: Bases Loaded, two out. Improper batter strikes out on a wild pitch. Everybody safe.

a) If no appeal, does batter get RBI?
b) If appeal and proper batter called out, does run count?

a) who cares. :)

b) No.

Hope so.

I think the two questions tie together... Did the runner score because of wild pitch (NO RBI), or because the batter became a runner(RBI)?

I wouldn't use Rule 10 to figure out Rules 1 thru 9.
Wendelstedt says "a runner has advanced as a result of the batter becoming a batter-runner when he is forced to advance as a result of a base on balls, uncaught third strike, etc....."
If he is not forced as in Jim Paronto's NCAA ruling (I think he meant leave him 3B otherwise he would have said return R2 to 2B) but I'm not sure how OBR rules but previous posters say no advances when the batter becomes a batter-runner.

yep. When I'm interpreting from memory on a non-ruleset-specific play, FED is my last source. So, apologies to those I said were "wrong"; we're just coming from different places.

I didn't make a typo; I typed exactly what I intended. I was just careless and wrong. I know who is supposed to be called out, as evidenced by post #29.

I'm not sure what Paronto's excuse is. ;)

In the R1, R3 play I gave, I learned that when determining whether R1 advanced because of the BB or because of the WP, go with the BB (and bring R1 back) because it doesn't require any conjecture. It sounds like Paronto might want a more nuanced approach. That is, if R3 scored, it is safe to assume that R1 would have advanced irrespective of the pitch being ball four (leave R1 at 2nd). I'll have to get that clarified.

Here's another scenario: R1, two outs. While improper batter is batting, R1 is picked off for third out. If an appeal is made at this point, is the proper batter out, or does he bat the next inning?

If there is no appeal, who bats next inning? Does the improper batter become the proper batter, or does the original proper batter bat?

My guess is that in either case, the same proper batter bats next inning, since the improper batter never finished batting.

That's correct -- no additional out and the proper batter is the proper batter ;)

For an improper batter to be called out, they must complete their plate appearance.

With a runner on first, I'd interpret the wild-pitch question differently than Paronto did, because the runner was forced to second, and furthermore the defensive team was denied the chance to put him out. Under no circumstance can an improper batter becoming a runner give the batting team an advantage.

With a runner on second and first base open, the advance stands because the runner's advancement was not affected by the improper batter becoming a runner. However, if the runner's advancement to third is a result of a play being made on the improper batter-runner, he will be forced to return to second.

If a runner on second (with first base open) attempts to steal third on ball four to an improper batter and is thrown out, the out stands and the proper batter is also out.

If a runner on first overslides second base on ball four to an improper batter and is thrown out, the out stands and the proper batter is also out.

In the strikeout/wild pitch scenario, the runners were forced to advance and would return to their bases at time of pitch, but it's irrelevant because the proper batter is the third out. Since the putout goes to the catcher it can be assumed that the proper batter is considered to be put out before he reaches first base.

In the strikeout/wild pitch scenario with less than two outs, the batter is out, so the runners are not forced and do advance because the pitch being strike three does not affect their advancement.

If there is a force play at second with less than two outs, the out at second stands and the proper batter is also out, because the rule for batting out of turn contains no provisions for returning runners who have been put out to their time-of-pitch base.

If there is a force play at second with two outs, or a double play that does not involve the batter-runner with one out, the only person ruled out is the proper batter because otherwise four outs would be recorded in the inning.

All scenarios assume that there is an improper batter and that an appeal is made. I am not an umpire but I know the rule and know how to enforce it.

edit: removed double post

Jaksa/Roder says this for BOOT:

"The proper batter is called out. This out supersedes an out of the improper batter, and if such improper batter was not out and became a runner, he is removed from his base (6.07b1)

Any runner who advanced because of the improper batter's batted ball or award must return to his TOP base. A runner who advanced for some other or additional reason (wild pickoff throw, overthrow, wild pitch, balk) is allowed his advance (6.07b2)

Any runner who became out during the continuous action must return to his base ; his out is nullified. Any outs gained independently of the improper batter becoming a batter-runner (steal pickoff, etc.) will stand."

As I recall, under FED, the outs stand

But if first and second bases are empty, and R3 runs home, is his run nullified by the proper batter being called out before reaching first base?

Actually, the proper batter is out without becoming a runner. Is that the same as being put out before reaching first?

I guess it would, if a clean strikeout (caught, or strike hitting the runner stealing home) would nullify a run on the third out.

Let's look at it this way... If a pitch results in an improper batter completing "his" turn at bat, and the appeal is made, then all runners are returned to their bases at the time of pitch. Is that correct?

Of course that would nullify any advance on a wild pitch, passed ball, stolen base, and also nullify any outs made on runners caught stealing, if these events occur on that pitch.

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.

I can say that Rob has been wrong in the past (not saying that as a dig, but even the top guys make mistakes.)

I'm just reporting the research. Everyone has been wrong in the past.

It's not as simple as you say, given the dialogue, and references to authoritative opinions that conflict. Historically, two things cause discussions to drag on and on, situations where there is no official ruling, and situations where there are conflicting rulings. Seems to me this falls into the category of the latter.

To me, it makes perfect sense to allow base advances that are not a direct result of the improper batter becoming a batter-runner. Where is the logic of allowing a lone runner from second to keep his advance of third while the improper batter remains at bat, whether it be by a straight steal, a passed ball, a wild pitch, an errant throw, or a balk? But he's not allowed to keep that advance if that straight steal, passed ball, etc., etc., happen as the improper batter receives Ball Four?

I agree that it's much cleaner and easier to just rule that all base advances get nullified when the improper batter completes his at-bat. After all, you could get into sticky situations where the umpires are left to judge if the base advance by other non-forced runners was really a result of the improper batter becoming a batter-runner. For example, a lone R2 advances to third on an uncaught third strike where the catcher makes a subsequent throw to first to retire the batter-runner. Sending R2 back regardless whether he advanced easily without the benefit of the throw going to first, or as a result of the throw going there, is a simpler solution than trying to figure out if his advance was aided by the play at first.

I have always believed that this cleaner, easier ruling was the norm. Now, I'm not so sure, since there apparently are some authoritative positions that say otherwise. Since I don't do much basebal anymore, I haven't kept my library of references (MLBUM, J/R, BRD, etc.) up to date to check for myself. But if it is indeed true that these different postions exist, I can understand the lengthy discussion.