Crazy play

[Alligator Bag]

Here is the sitch. Runners on 2nd and 3rd and 1 out. 3-0 count and I from B position call balk. Score R3 and place R2 at 3rd. Junior high game so pitcher asks and I explain. Return to B position and my partner puts ball in play and pitcher pitches.
Ground ball to 2nd baseman and I notice runner going from 1st to 2nd. R1 is safe at 2nd and BR is out at 1st.
Runner from 3rd scores.
I call time and ask PU where R1 came from. He doesn't know.
I go to home book and ask to see it and find out if I missed placing the runner.
As it turns out, runner on 1st was batter and had a 3-0 count when he took off for 1st after the balk.
Now what?!
After much thought this is what I went with.
I called batting out of order. I placed runner from 3rd who scored back to 3rd.
Called the proper batter, now runner at 2nd, out.
And placed the batter who grounded out, the proper batter, back at the plate to bat.
Did I kick this or do you have anything else?

[Jim Porter]

There ain't no rules for a major screw-up like that one. Just make sure it doesn't happen again. I doubt I would've compounded my error by calling batting out of order. Yikes. I probably would've put the original batter back at the plate and done the whole thing over again. No matter what you do, though, you're going to hear it and you need to stand there and take it.

[bluezebra]

That's what happens when the umpire(s) don't observe what is happening BEFORE putting the ball back into play.

You and your partner screwed up. Call time. Put the runners where they belonged after the balk call. Put the batter back in the box, 3-0. Why compound your goof by letting the offense get an advantage from your mistake?

There is a rule for this situation. It's called the rule of common sense.

"PLAY BALL!!"

Bob

[Edited by bluezebra on Sep 5th, 2003 at 12:58 AM]

[Bfair]

I don't know if there's a right or wrong answer because alert umpiring is supposed to avoid the situation. Still, $hit happens, and times can arise when you need to make a decision that you feel is fair for the situation. I doubt if any of us consider ourselves perfect.

With the ball being hit fair by an improper batter, I don't think I'd have brought the error at that time to anyone's attention. It's the responsibility of the defense to bring that to the attention of the umpire's, and the umpire's should not "autocorrect" the problem because they see it. IMO, the ball being hit fair would be the point of not considering to "undo" the error previously made.
If the defense appealed at the proper time, I would uphold the BOOT as you did.

However, if the error was noticed before the improper batter hit the ball fair, I'd have likely put the runner from 1B back to the plate with his 3-0 count and continued the game from that point.

BTW, I want to compliment you on your candor to bring a situation like this to the forum.
It's difficult to admit error, but situations like this help us learn..........


Freix

[SC Ump]

Originally posted by Bfair
If the defense appealed at the proper time, I would uphold the BOOT as you did.

I understand the different opinions here. My initial thoughts were, and probably what I would still do is "undo" the play. If during a timeout, a pitcher takes the rubber without the ball when trying the hidden ball trick and the ball is put into play improperly, isn't the proper response to undo the attempted hidden-ball pick-off? Though this balk/extra-runner situation is not specifically covered in the rules, I would think the ball was indeed put into play improperly with an extra runner at first.

If I were to follow this procedure, then what would happen if the extra-runner eventually scored, would the run count? How about if in a different situation, no one (officially) on the bases and a first base coach casually puts his foot on the bag. The batter were to then hit a home run and the 1st base coach ran the bases in front of the batter/runner, would the defense officially have to lodge an appeal before the next pitch that the coach/runner was not a legal runner?

I know I'm taking it to the absurb level, but only doing so in thinking through the specifics.

[nine01c]

Well, your PU should have "known" that the runner mistakenly went to 1B on the BALK (ball 4) pitch when you asked him how he got there. Once the following pitch occured, and the defense did not complain about the runner at 1B, I would have kept quiet and let it alone. Certainly an umpire mistake would not warrant a "batting out of order." After the game would be a good time to discuss the play and make PU aware that the pitch does not count when a BALK is penalized.

If I had to make an official ruling on this, I would probably go with the fact that it was too late to do any adjustments after that following pitch occured (to the next batter). For example, if an umpire mistakenly awards a runner 3B instead of 2B, then there is a pitch, wouldn't it be too late to send the runner back to 2B?

[gsf23]

I agree here....if a pitch has been thrown, I think you have to let it be, and eat the mistake.

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by Alligator Bag

Did I kick this or do you have anything else?

Like a lot of the other respondents, I think you probably did kick the call but I don't guess that anyone of us is fool enough to think that this weird situation couldn't also happen to them!

There is a precedent for a "fix" here. I would agree with all of those who said to start over from where the ball was improperly put in play with the proper batter on 1st base.

The precedent originally comes from JEA in relation to umpires improperly putting the ball in play without the requisite number of defensive players on the field, but with a few other references it is close enough to be able to justify your ruling a do over in this case too. Consider the following from JEA:

From OBR 1.01
Situations: Top of 5th inning. The first batter walks. The next batter doubles to right. The umpire realizes that there has been no left fielder since the inning started. Do you allow the runners to remain on base or do you start the inning over? RULING: No action may take place with less than nine defensive players on the field. The inning starts over.

From OBR 5.11
Professional Interpretation: This writer contends that it is also essential that the batter be in the batter’s box and reasonably set before the call of “Play” is signaled. (Identical to the procedure for starting the game ...4.02).

In addition, failure to have the batter in his set position could conceivably subject the pitcher to a penalty for an illegal pitch (2.00 illegal Pitch).

Given the three citations from JEA referenced here (1.01, 4.02 and 5.11), I'd say there was ample argument for a do over from the moment the ball was improperly put back into play with the batter standing on 1st base.

Hope this helps.

Cheers

[Bfair]

I would agree with your logic, Warren.
Keep in mind, however, that the cited Evans passage applies only to OBR here in the states. Fed and NCAA would not necessarily agree---thus posing another problem of rectifying the situation.

It's an unfortunate situation that is not specifically addressed, and the official has to do what he decides is the best remedy for the situation.


Freix

[nine01c]

I wrote to rulesofbaseball.com for their opinion of how to rule this situation. This was the reply I received:


"The pitch to the next batter would not necessarily mean the wrongly enforced walk would stand, though some umpires would use that rationale. If the pitch was batted you've probably crossed the point of no return and the umpires would have to "eat" the mistake. However, if it was not batted and runners were still in the positions they were in after the mistaken ruling, it would be an option to nullify the pitch or pitches and bring the batter back to bat with a 3-0 count. Fact of the matter is that the rules don't specifically cover this so an umpire would be expected to rule according to what he/she thought was fair.

World Umpires Association

[Alligator Bag]

I appreciate everyone's replies. This is what some of the thought process was to get to batting out of order. I don't believe putting the ball in play incorrectly applies here. We wouldn't keep from putting the ball in play if the incorrect batter took the spot from the beginning of the pitch sequence. Since there was a batted ball, an out, and a runner crosses the plate, I don't believe you can just pretend like it didn't happen. I am a little confused as to what mistake there is to "eat". We didn't award the batter first, or so my partner says, so I don't believe the improper batter should be ignored. Just tried to be as fair as possible and have some part of the book to go by. I did run this by a couple of MLB umpires I know and even though we were not using those rules, both did mention batting out of order first. Just a few more thoughts and ideas and once again, I liked reading all the replies.

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by Alligator Bag
I appreciate everyone's replies. This is what some of the thought process was to get to batting out of order. I don't believe putting the ball in play incorrectly applies here. We wouldn't keep from putting the ball in play if the incorrect batter took the spot from the beginning of the pitch sequence. Since there was a batted ball, an out, and a runner crosses the plate, I don't believe you can just pretend like it didn't happen.

The argument, from an OBR perspective, is that your Batter standing on 1st base hasn't yet completed his time at bat per OBR 6.04, so your PU should have directed him to return to the plate to complete his turn at bat. I think that's the "mistake" that Roder suggests you might have to "eat" if enough intervening game play has taken place when you notice it.

According to JEA your PU shouldn't have put the ball into play unless the batter was also in the batter's box - that's where my suggestion arose that your PU may have improperly put the ball back into play, but that was based on the expressed OPINION of the author of JEA, and not on any official MLB interpretation. The logic there also assumes that either you and your partner knew the guy on 1st should still have been the batter, which you clearly didn't until afterward.

Even if your PU didn't improperly put the ball back into play, allowing another batter to complete the proper batter's time at bat meets only half of the prerequisite conditions for BOOT under OBR 6.07(a). The other half of the requirement is that the proper batter should first have failed to bat in the proper turn. Your guy actually batted in the proper turn, so BOOT probably doesn't really apply - he just didn't complete the at bat himself. The rules simply don't recognise that the umpires might allow the proper batter to start an at bat and then permit another batter to complete that at bat without a legal substitution having first taken place.

As for the Do-Over, the point of my JEA citations was to show that there are examples under OBR where ignoring the batted ball, the out and the runner crossing the plate is EXACTLY what you should do in similar cases - for instance under OBR 1.01, having started an inning without the requisite number of defensive players. In that case you can go 3 outs, 44 pitches, seven base awards and 10 runs but if there weren't 9 defensive players at the start of that inning then you still are supposed to nullify everything and start over. Ok, ok, your case wasn't under OBR, but most times when a rule is not covered under one code you are permitted to draw on the equivalent interpretations from another code until you are directed otherwise.

Originally posted by Alligator Bag
I am a little confused as to what mistake there is to "eat". We didn't award the batter first, or so my partner says, so I don't believe the improper batter should be ignored. Just tried to be as fair as possible and have some part of the book to go by. I did run this by a couple of MLB umpires I know and even though we were not using those rules, both did mention batting out of order first. Just a few more thoughts and ideas and once again, I liked reading all the replies.

FWIW I don't agree with Rick Roder's summation either, but that an airplane ticket and $AUD2.50c might get you a cup of coffee Down Under. The point is that the situation you presented is clearly not covered under the rules. You guys applied your common sense and made a decision. It is not the exact same decision that I would have made, but if you were able justify it to the coaches and avoid a protest then you have settled on a winner and good luck to you.

It was an interesting question, Al, and I thank you for raising it here and giving me an opportunity to think it through and toss in my $AUD0.02c worth.

Cheers

[SC Ump]

Originally posted by Alligator Bag
I am a little confused as to what mistake there is to "eat".

If in a different play, the batter advanced to first on ball three, would you just allow that batter to remain at first and then rule the next batter improperly finished the first batter's turn at bat?

I hope not. I hope you would tell the batter that he is not allowed to be at first after ball three.

[Jim Porter]

Originally posted by Alligator Bag
I am a little confused as to what mistake there is to "eat".

For starters, your partner letting the batter run down to occupy first on a balk. Second, your partner not noticing a runner on first before putting the ball back into play right after a balk. Third, you not noticing a runner standing on first just after you called and explained a balk.

The whole mess is completely you and your partner's faults. You guys need to pay attention to all the players on the field before putting a ball back into play. One of you should've noticed that batter-runner standing on first right after you called a balk. Neither of you did. That's your mistake.

[Alligator Bag]

Mr. Porter,
I understand that the mistake is ours. We all know we should pay attention. I for one am human. Since evidently you haven't mistakingly put the ball in play or awarded undeserved bases, you can't relate to this post. I simply put it out for discussion to see if it may be covered under any rule and hope that the rest of us learn from it.
Have a great day