BOO today

[Tru_in_Blu]

OK, some of you are touching on the aspect of the situation that concerned me.

First off, here's what we did:
The incorrect batter's time at bat was negated.
The player who should have batted (just before the incorrect batter batted) was called out.
The runner who scored on the wild pitch was returned to the base.
The (former) incorrect batter came to bat again (and was retired).

I found this in the March 2010 Plays & Clarifications. I think some modifications were made to the BOO effects since then.

Section D[2] Addresses batting out of order after the incorrect batter has completed their turn at bat and before a pitch (legal or illegal) to the next batter; or before the pitcher and all infielders have vacated their normal fielding positions and have left fair territory.

If the incorrect batter completes their turn at bat and then is discovered by the defense before a pitch to the next batter; or before all infielders have vacated their normal fielding positions, the player who should have batted is ruled out and the out would be recorded in the proper batter’s position in the line-up. Any advancement by a runner(s) or any run(s) that scored because of the incorrect batter becoming a batter-runner would be nullified. Runners would return to their base(s). Any outs made because of the improper batting stand. The next batter to bat would be the player whose name follows that of the batter who was declared out for not batting in proper order with one exception. The exception would be if the incorrect batter is called out as a result of their time at bat and is the next scheduled batter. Simply skip them in the batting order as they have already been credited with an out, and the next person in the line-up would be the next batter.

So where I got hung up was on 3 of the effect:
3) Any advancement or score of a runner as a result of the incorrect batter is negated. Runners not called out must return to the last base occupied at the time of the pitch. Any runner who is called out prior to the discovery of the infraction remains out.

The runner from third base scored on Ball 3. I remember that because I ended up going from "C" back to "A" and then the batter walked on the next pitch.

I guess we should have ruled that the runner should have scored because it was not as a direct "result" of anything that the incorrect batter did.

There's also this reference to "at the time of the pitch". I think this refers to the incorrect batter putting the ball into play.

A couple of more scenarios that will serve to further confuse myself.

Had the runner from third advanced and scored on a wild pitch ball four, would that count as a "result" of the incorrect batter? And if we're returning the runner, to third or back to second?

Had there been 2 outs and the batter popped out to F1 who then dropped the ball for an error with the incorrect batter reaching first base and the runner scoring, is that considered "a result" of the incorrect batter?

If there was no WP but the BR then ran to second and in the subsequent action, the runner from third scored, would she have to be returned or not?

I think my/our mistake was thinking that what happened "during" the incorrect batter's time at bat would all be negated (except if the runner was out trying to advance on a steal/WP/PB).

I'm trying to recall how many BOOs I've had during my time umpiring. I think I can count them on 1 hand. Looks like I/we kicked this one.

And the home team won the game when their runner who had been placed on second base scored on 2 wild pitches.

[josephrt1]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

I found this in the March 2010 Plays & Clarifications. I think some modifications were made to the BOO effects since then.

There was a rule change maybe in 2012 or so which changes the ruling on this play. In the old days you could have gotten 2 outs; one for the person who did not bat and one for the person who did bat. this has been changed.

In either case, a runner who advanced before the ball was put in play or before a walk would still get credit for their advance.

[Tru_in_Blu]

Originally Posted by josephrt1

There was a rule change maybe in 2012 or so which changes the ruling on this play. In the old days you could have gotten 2 outs; one for the person who did not bat and one for the person who did bat. this has been changed.

In either case, a runner who advanced before the ball was put in play or before a walk would still get credit for their advance.

That sounds right. One of the plays they had back in that March article was this one:

Situation 2:

With no outs, R1 on 1B and B2 scheduled to bat, B4 comes to bat instead and grounds into a double play. The defense appeals B4 batting out of order before a pitch to the next batter.

Ruling:

The double play stands and B2 is out for missing their turn at bat, resulting in the third out. B3 will lead off the next inning. (7-2D[2b])

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

OK, some of you are touching on the aspect of the situation that concerned me.

First off, here's what we did:
The incorrect batter's time at bat was negated.
The player who should have batted (just before the incorrect batter batted) was called out.
The runner who scored on the wild pitch was returned to the base.
The (former) incorrect batter came to bat again (and was retired).

I found this in the March 2010 Plays & Clarifications. I think some modifications were made to the BOO effects since then.

Section D[2] Addresses batting out of order after the incorrect batter has completed their turn at bat and before a pitch (legal or illegal) to the next batter; or before the pitcher and all infielders have vacated their normal fielding positions and have left fair territory.

If the incorrect batter completes their turn at bat and then is discovered by the defense before a pitch to the next batter; or before all infielders have vacated their normal fielding positions, the player who should have batted is ruled out and the out would be recorded in the proper batter’s position in the line-up. Any advancement by a runner(s) or any run(s) that scored because of the incorrect batter becoming a batter-runner would be nullified. Runners would return to their base(s). Any outs made because of the improper batting stand. The next batter to bat would be the player whose name follows that of the batter who was declared out for not batting in proper order with one exception. The exception would be if the incorrect batter is called out as a result of their time at bat and is the next scheduled batter. Simply skip them in the batting order as they have already been credited with an out, and the next person in the line-up would be the next batter.

So where I got hung up was on 3 of the effect:
3) Any advancement or score of a runner as a result of the incorrect batter is negated. Runners not called out must return to the last base occupied at the time of the pitch. Any runner who is called out prior to the discovery of the infraction remains out.

The runner from third base scored on Ball 3. I remember that because I ended up going from "C" back to "A" and then the batter walked on the next pitch.

I guess we should have ruled that the runner should have scored because it was not as a direct "result" of anything that the incorrect batter did.

There's also this reference to "at the time of the pitch". I think this refers to the incorrect batter putting the ball into play.

A couple of more scenarios that will serve to further confuse myself.

Had the runner from third advanced and scored on a wild pitch ball four, would that count as a "result" of the incorrect batter? And if we're returning the runner, to third or back to second?

Had there been 2 outs and the batter popped out to F1 who then dropped the ball for an error with the incorrect batter reaching first base and the runner scoring, is that considered "a result" of the incorrect batter?

If there was no WP but the BR then ran to second and in the subsequent action, the runner from third scored, would she have to be returned or not?

I think my/our mistake was thinking that what happened "during" the incorrect batter's time at bat would all be negated (except if the runner was out trying to advance on a steal/WP/PB).

I'm trying to recall how many BOOs I've had during my time umpiring. I think I can count them on 1 hand. Looks like I/we kicked this one.

And the home team won the game when their runner who had been placed on second base scored on 2 wild pitches.

For a "proper" BOO appeal (i.e. after the at bat ends but before the next pitch), the dividing line between runners' advances that stand and those that are negated is when the batter becomes a BR. Advances at the time of the pitch when the batter becomes a BR (or after) are negated. Advances due to action before that stand (e.g. stolen base, passed ball, wild pitch, illegal pitch).

[Tru_in_Blu]

Originally Posted by Dakota

For a "proper" BOO appeal (i.e. after the at bat ends but before the next pitch), the dividing line between runners' advances that stand and those that are negated is when the batter becomes a BR. Advances at the time of the pitch when the batter becomes a BR (or after) are negated. Advances due to action before that stand (e.g. stolen base, passed ball, wild pitch, illegal pitch).

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?

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

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.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by Dakota

For a "proper" BOO appeal (i.e. after the at bat ends but before the next pitch), the dividing line between runners' advances that stand and those that are negated is when the batter becomes a BR. Advances at the time of the pitch when the batter becomes a BR (or after) are negated. Advances due to action before that stand (e.g. stolen base, passed ball, wild pitch, illegal pitch).

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

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?

Originally Posted by teebob21

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.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

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

This was the clarification I missed in my original answer.

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?"

[Tru_in_Blu]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

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.

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.

[Tru_in_Blu]

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.