OK, does a batter who receives a base on balls become a batter-runner? The ball is still live.

In our hypothetical situation, with the runner still on third, the batter gets a walk and rounds first base heading for second. The defense plays on the runner going to second who gets in a rundown which allows the runner from third to score.

After the appeal for the BOO, does the run score?

The game is played one pitch at a time. If the BOO batter becomes a batter-runner and is subsequently properly appealed, the runners return to the base held at the time of the pitch. In this example, the runner is returned to 3b, and the run comes off the board, same as if she had hit a double.

We are off on a tangent that has some inaccuracies. Becoming a batter-runner, while most often the case, really has nothing to do with the BOO rule. The rule relates to completing the at-bat; and that incorrect batter might have never become a batter-runner (strikes out and catcher catches 3k).

While many knowledgeable coaches may ignore BOO if the result of the at-bat is favorable, a) the coach may prefer the BOO result to another out made by the incorrect batter solely because it sets up a more favorable next batter, and b) even a strike out may have secondary action that they would prefer be negated, and c) the vast majority of coaches that may have figured out they need to wait until the at-bat is complete still aren't smart enough to know to ignore it if favorable. So here's my version of what ELSE you need to know, regardless of the what-ifs:

1) If BOO is appealed after the the at-bat ends and before a pitch to a following batter, you MUST apply the rule, even if, as you apply the propr EFFECT, the coach realizes that the result of the play was more favorable, and
2) When the EFFECT says to negate the result, it would be more accurate to say to negate the results of the last pitch of the at-bat, other than any outs made by runners.

So, look at every "what-if", and the result is covered in what I restated.

And, yes, read the batter-runner rule, 8.1 "Batter becomes a batter-runner when .......", particularly C.

This was the clarification I missed in my original answer. :o :rolleyes:

I think that might answer the TruBlu question above:
"Had the runner from third advanced and scored on a wild pitch ball four, would that count as a "result" of the incorrect batter?"

In our situation in the OP where the runner from 3rd scored on a wild pitch which was ball three, the run should have counted.

At that point, I think the defensive coach was screwed because if she had appealed BOO at that point, the correct batter simply would have come to bat and assumed the ball/strike count.

In my hypothetical scenario where the improper batter received ball 4 and got in a rundown to allow the runner from 3rd to score, the improper batter had completed a turn at bat. And, on the last pitch of that at bat is when she became a BR and the runner scored from third. The appeal at that point would have sent the runner back to third base.

Hopefully, I'm getting this right.

Thanx for all the inputs and discussion.

OK, now I'm going back to yesteryear when I was a player-coach to see how I could possibly use this rule advantageously. I tried that a lot, manipulating rules.

In the modified and fast pitch games, if I was the defensive coach and the OP situation played out, I might try this. If I was aware of the BOO at the time.

When the BOO was noticed, I'd get the infielders together and put this play on. Intentionally walk the BOO batter, but on ball four, oops!, throw a wild pitch. Maybe we'd get lucky and grab an out if the runner tried to score from third base. If we get the out, bonus. Outs will stand. Even if the runner scored, it was a result of the BOO batter becoming a BR. Now appeal the BOO before the next batter.

The correct batter would be ruled out.
The runner from third (if s/he scored) would be returned to third. If out, remains out.
The BOO batter's time at bat would be negated, and the correct batter would then come up to bat.

Course I'd need an umpire who knew this rule better than I did in order to pull it off. :o

With no pitch intentional walks, I would think the safest thing to do would be to immediately take the free out. You don't want them to get time to figure out what's going on.

Pretty sure that in fast pitch and modified fast pitch, the pitcher must pitch to walk the batter intentionally.

http://www.mpssaa.org/assets/1/6/201...ss_Release.pdf and I'm guessing that like it or not that will eventually be the rule at every level of both sports.

Well, bully for them.

I don't know how many NFHS games I've worked over the years and I'm struggling to remember if I've seen even *2* IBBs.

Oh, and edited to add, I have seen some intentional unintentional walks. Or should that be the other way?

I know about NFHS changing the IBB rule. But since Tru_in_Blu mentioned fast pitch and modified, I was thinking USA Softball.