Adding players to a lineup

[bainsey]

ASA Co-Ed Slow Pitch.

Team A starts with nine players, bats nine.

After the lead-off hitter bats a second time, other A players arrive. A captain wants to add them to the line-up. Umpire forbids this. A captain seeks B captain's consent. Is there anything that may allow this?

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by bainsey

ASA Co-Ed Slow Pitch.

Team A starts with nine players, bats nine.

After the lead-off hitter bats a second time, other A players arrive. A captain wants to add them to the line-up. Umpire forbids this. A captain seeks B captain's consent. Is there anything that may allow this?

USA Rule 4-1-A-2, 4-1-D-2-B & G

The gist of these rules is late arriving roster members may be added to the eligible sub list at any time, that if playing shorthanded and an eligible sub arrives the player must be entered into the empty spot in the lineup, and that co-ed lineup and defensive field position rules must still be followed. (caveat: I don't do slow pitch.)

[Big Slick]

Dakota is correct, playing under championship rules, a team is allowed to (and must) start short handed if they have one player below the minimum. The blank spot is at the bottom of the line up (or "next to bottom" for co-ed purposes) and must be filled when the person arrives, or that person is ineligible to play.

I stress "championship rules"; I dare believe this was a league game and there are most likely league rules that allow or not allow late arrivals and/or with or without penalty.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Big Slick

The blank spot is at the bottom of the line up (or "next to bottom" for co-ed purposes) and must be filled when the person arrives, or that person is ineligible to play.

Okay, then using this rule set, let's say nine have batted, the 10th hasn't arrived yet, and we go back to the top of the order. (Our league allows three or four women to bat, and the alternating stops when you run out of one gender or the other.) That team is locked in with nine batters, correct? A tenth could not be added to the lineup or the field, correct?

[UmpireErnie]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Okay, then using this rule set, let's say nine have batted, the 10th hasn't arrived yet, and we go back to the top of the order. (Our league allows three or four women to bat, and the alternating stops when you run out of one gender or the other.) That team is locked in with nine batters, correct? A tenth could not be added to the lineup or the field, correct?

It depends what your local rules say. Under book rules the ninth or tenth spot is a short handed rule out whenever it comes up. When a sub (of correct gender) they fill the open spot. Others who arrive late are just extra subs. There have to be ten spots in batting order even if one is vacant and being called out when due up.

But local league slow pitch rules will modify rule book rules so your mileage may vary. 😎

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Okay, then using this rule set, let's say nine have batted, the 10th hasn't arrived yet, and we go back to the top of the order. (Our league allows three or four women to bat, and the alternating stops when you run out of one gender or the other.) That team is locked in with nine batters, correct? A tenth could not be added to the lineup or the field, correct?

Local rules are made by fools

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Okay, then using this rule set, let's say nine have batted, the 10th hasn't arrived yet, and we go back to the top of the order. (Our league allows three or four women to bat, and the alternating stops when you run out of one gender or the other.) That team is locked in with nine batters, correct? A tenth could not be added to the lineup or the field, correct?

No. That's not what he (or the rule) says. They MUST add the 10th (shorthanded) player whenever an appropriate player arrives. No matter how many times you go around.

What they cannot do is add EP's after you start.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

No. That's not what he (or the rule) says. They MUST add the 10th (shorthanded) player whenever an appropriate player arrives. No matter how many times you go around.

What they cannot do is add EP's after you start.

Okay, thanks. Follow up: If the team presently has nine, and no tenth player comes to bat, is it an automatic out before the lead-off hitter comes to bat? Can I get a rule citation?

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Okay, thanks. Follow up: If the team presently has nine, and no tenth player comes to bat, is it an automatic out before the lead-off hitter comes to bat? Can I get a rule citation?

4.1-D.1 Shorthanded Rule

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Local rules are made by fools

I disagree with that statement to some extent. Local rules are made by people who understand who the majority of players PAYING to play in their league are. The majority of players playing in Recreational Leagues are not going out and playing USA Tourneys on the weekends. They are out to play for 1 or 2 nights per week. The local rules allow some flexibility to allow the games to be played and the participants to get what they PAID for, the chance to participate in the games.

Are some rules over the top stupid? Absolutely, because at some point they do start to mess with the integrity of the game, but some of the rules do exactly what the purpose of the local rule is, getting those who are paying to participate a chance to participate.

It is made very clear at our yearly league clinic. "We are in a business to attract teams. Without teams you, as umpires, don't have games to work."

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Okay, thanks. Follow up: If the team presently has nine, and no tenth player comes to bat, is it an automatic out before the lead-off hitter comes to bat? Can I get a rule citation?

We had this situation last week in one of the leagues I do. League tourney, first round game. Co-Rec. Both teams are playing with only 9 players (5 males, 4 females). The teams want to agree to not take the out. Our UIC (my partner on the game), rules that even with the agreement we can't void the rule, so each team took an out after the 9th batter.

Local League rules specifically say the out shall be taken, in bold letters.

[Linknblue]

This stuff happens all the time in coed. You can "add" players to make a complete lineup if they're late. You can't have more men than women unless you take outs where women should bat. Alternate batting is the key always. You can have 5 men and 4 women on the field as long as you get an out for the vacant woman. If you have 5 women and 4 men you don't have to take an out, you have two women batting in a row. Always get the managers to agree on what you are doin. Makes it easier. Our leagues (managers) allow teams to pick up players from other teams to just play games....rules say you can't but they do it. I'm not going to intervene in this situation where managers are in agreement............why would I? Let the rec department deal with roster issues.

This is "Wreck" ball. Anything that makes sense goes. These folks pay their money to play. As long as a team doesn't get an advantage, who cares?

Local "wreck" rules, like Irish said, are written by fools.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

I disagree with that statement to some extent. Local rules are made by people who understand who the majority of players PAYING to play in their league are. The majority of players playing in Recreational Leagues are not going out and playing USA Tourneys on the weekends. They are out to play for 1 or 2 nights per week. The local rules allow some flexibility to allow the games to be played and the participants to get what they PAID for, the chance to participate in the games.

Are some rules over the top stupid? Absolutely, because at some point they do start to mess with the integrity of the game, but some of the rules do exactly what the purpose of the local rule is, getting those who are paying to participate a chance to participate.

It is made very clear at our yearly league clinic. "We are in a business to attract teams. Without teams you, as umpires, don't have games to work."

I understand who is paying the bills. That doesn't make what they want to do right, nor does it mean as an umpire I would have to work those games. Do you do everything the players and sponsors want? If not, why not? After all, they are paying the bills.

[Andy]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

I disagree with that statement to some extent. Local rules are made by people who understand who the majority of players PAYING to play in their league are. The majority of players playing in Recreational Leagues are not going out and playing USA Tourneys on the weekends. They are out to play for 1 or 2 nights per week. The local rules allow some flexibility to allow the games to be played and the participants to get what they PAID for, the chance to participate in the games.

Are some rules over the top stupid? Absolutely, because at some point they do start to mess with the integrity of the game, but some of the rules do exactly what the purpose of the local rule is, getting those who are paying to participate a chance to participate.

It is made very clear at our yearly league clinic. "We are in a business to attract teams. Without teams you, as umpires, don't have games to work."

The issue is that the local rules are enacted in good faith and seem to be what people want, but the groups making the local rules don't have enough of a grasp of the entire rule book and don't consider how their local rules could interact with other rules in the book. This creates two issues....

1. Teams that do choose to participate in championship play think that their local league rules are "the" rules and will get upset when a ruling is made that is correct by book, but not per the local rules.

2. The teams are playing within their local rules and not learning how to play situational softball within championship rules that could be to their advantage.

I've always maintained that we have a perfectly good rule book that a lot of thought and preparation goes into (speaking USA SB)...why don't we use it instead of trying to change everything?

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Andy

The issue is that the local rules are enacted in good faith and seem to be what people want, but the groups making the local rules don't have enough of a grasp of the entire rule book and don't consider how their local rules could interact with other rules in the book. This creates two issues....

1. Teams that do choose to participate in championship play think that their local league rules are "the" rules and will get upset when a ruling is made that is correct by book, but not per the local rules.

2. The teams are playing within their local rules and not learning how to play situational softball within championship rules that could be to their advantage.

I've always maintained that we have a perfectly good rule book that a lot of thought and preparation goes into (speaking USA SB)...why don't we use it instead of trying to change everything?

And the more immediate and more obvious effect is the open holes and ambiguous provisions. The real rule book has enough of those anyway, but the local ones are more likely to occur.