ASA February Clarifications

[Andy]

Originally Posted by youngump

February Plays and Clarifications

#1 is throwing me for a loop.
"In this play it appears that the defensive coach has begun to come out of the dugout but has not requested time to protest so the substitution of the player by the offense would now put Davis legally in the game."

So if the defense had requested time to protest then the umpire's error in letting the offense come in first would be ignored and we'd honor the protest? I'm also confused by the assertion in that quote given that the OP says:
"The defense requests time and the defensive manager, who was waiting for Davis to complete their turn at bat, begins to come out of the dugout to protest the unreported substitute."

Thoughts?

I think how I would handle this situation:

Defensive Coach comes out of the dugout and is walking toward me...If it looks like he is coming to talk to me, I will call time.
Offensive coach now starts to speak, I either ignore or tell him I will talk to him in a moment, because the defense had my attention first.

I would allow defensive coach to appeal the unreported sub and deal with it.
Now I have to deal with the offensive coach and manage that situation. Bottom line is that the offensive coach and player have had ample opportunity to properly report the sub into the game and did not do so.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Andy

I think how I would handle this situation:

Defensive Coach comes out of the dugout and is walking toward me...If it looks like he is coming to talk to me, I will call time.
Offensive coach now starts to speak, I either ignore or tell him I will talk to him in a moment, because the defense had my attention first.

I would allow defensive coach to appeal the unreported sub and deal with it.
Now I have to deal with the offensive coach and manage that situation. Bottom line is that the offensive coach and player have had ample opportunity to properly report the sub into the game and did not do so.

Much like when you have multiple violations, you address actions in the order which they occur.

Makes a lot of sense to me.

[IRISHMAFIA]

PLAY: F1 is an unreported substitute with B1 at bat with a 1-2 count. B1 hits the ball to F6, who throws to F3 to retire B1. The offensive coach wants to protest F1 for being unreported.

RULING: In this case the unreported substitute, F1 did not make a play. Since F1 did not make the play and it is brought to the attention of the umpire F1 is now in the game with no penalty. The pitch is considered in the case of an appeal meaning that was the appeal before or after a pitch. This is not an appeal it is a protest. The act of F1 making a pitch is not making a play. Rule 4, Section 6C8

Actually, I have a problem with this rule. Not the play or given ruling, but the rule in general.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

PLAY: F1 is an unreported substitute with B1 at bat with a 1-2 count. B1 hits the ball to F6, who throws to F3 to retire B1. The offensive coach wants to protest F1 for being unreported.

RULING: In this case the unreported substitute, F1 did not make a play. Since F1 did not make the play and it is brought to the attention of the umpire F1 is now in the game with no penalty. The pitch is considered in the case of an appeal meaning that was the appeal before or after a pitch. This is not an appeal it is a protest. The act of F1 making a pitch is not making a play. Rule 4, Section 6C8

Actually, I have a problem with this rule. Not the play or given ruling, but the rule in general.

Please explain.

[AtlUmpSteve]

I don't speak for Mike; he can certainly speak for himself.

Assuming I know what he's saying, I absolutely agree. I think it is absurd to have no penalty for a team not reporting substitutions. There are now teams that make NOT reporting subs a team strategy; if not brought to plate umpire's attention (and many teams do not bother, since there is no penalty), they have multiple re-entries, and subs playing in more than one position for more than one starter. And nothing can been done to keep it legal, because there is no record of a prior participation.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

I don't speak for Mike; he can certainly speak for himself.

Assuming I know what he's saying, I absolutely agree. I think it is absurd to have no penalty for a team not reporting substitutions. There are now teams that make NOT reporting subs a team strategy; if not brought to plate umpire's attention (and many teams do not bother, since there is no penalty), they have multiple re-entries, and subs playing in more than one position for more than one starter. And nothing can been done to keep it legal, because there is no record of a prior participation.

And I blame the opposing team for not saying something the first time it happens. They set themselves up for ignoring the violation just because there is no real penalty.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

I don't speak for Mike; he can certainly speak for himself.

Assuming I know what he's saying, I absolutely agree. I think it is absurd to have no penalty for a team not reporting substitutions. There are now teams that make NOT reporting subs a team strategy; if not brought to plate umpire's attention (and many teams do not bother, since there is no penalty), they have multiple re-entries, and subs playing in more than one position for more than one starter. And nothing can been done to keep it legal, because there is no record of a prior participation.

Steve is correct, this is exactly to what I was alluding. When this change in the rules occurred, it was simply a dummying down to help relieve the coaches/managers of the responsibility of thinking and playing the game fairly. I'm just trying to figure out just how the game survived for over 75 years of the rules in place that required a little brain power on behalf of the teams.

[josephrt1]

So along those lines I have 3 notes in my book on section 4.6.C:

There are 3 different terms used in 4.6:
1. Is discovered
2. Is brought to the attention of the umpire
3. Is protested
Do they all mean the same thing. To be “protested” and “brought to the attention” require someone else to notify the ump. But “is discovered” is vague. If I as the ump detect the change, is that “discovered”?