Batting Out of Order question
 

On a test I saw recently, this was one of the questions. NFHS Rules.

The batting order reads: Abel, Baker, Charles, Daniel, Edward, etc.
With no outs it is Abel’s turn to bat but Charles erroneously bats and hits a double.
Abel and Baker both strikeout. It is Charles turn to bat but the defensive team informs the umpire that Charles is on second base.

These are the choices for answers. (Check all the apply) *
__Charles is out.
__Charles remains on second base and the proper batter is daniel.
__Charles is removed from second base and is brought in to bat.
__Abel is out.
__Baker is out.
__No one is out.

In addition to Charles remaining on base,
the correct answer says "No one is out".
Do you know why Abel and Baker would not be out?

Because once a pitch was thrown to Abel, that made Charles's at bat legal and Daniel should have been the proper batter. After Able had completed their at bat and a pitch was thrown to Baker, that then made Abel's at bat legal and reset the batting order again making Baker the correct batter. Abel and Baker are not out because by rule their at bats became legal once a pitch had been thrown to another batter.

Except they were out in their at bats, legally. "Abel and Baker both strikeout"

You're reading too much into it. Nobody is additionally out for BOO. Charles remains at second, Daniel is the proper batter, 2 outs.

That is what I would say, it's the test scoring that says a difference.

In addition to Charles remaining on base,
the correct answer says "No one is out".

I'll assume they mean no one is out as a result of the appeal to the BOO.

What kind of test gives the option of "picking all that apply"? I don't recall ever seeing that in either ASA/USA or NFHS.

Definitely not a "true" NFHS Test question. Those I've taken have all entailed single choice answers, to include ones that would say, for example, "A and B are correct".

Perhaps this was a local association's test using NFHS rules.

This was my point. Nobody is additionally out for BOO.

It's a poorly worded question. There's no reason to argue that here. The correct (real world) ruling is obvious.

Meh. When the defense appeals (by pointing out the next batter in the order is on second base) the ruling is that Charlie remains on 2nd, Daniel is the next batter, and no-one is out. QED.

Regardless of prior chaos, in ruling on a BOO appeal, we determine who was the proper batter and if said batter is out for not batting in the proper order. If the next batter (who follows the proper batter) is on base, that batter is skipped.

I confirmed what we thought with a UIC type and 2 outs from the strikeouts is correct, both NFHS and USA.

That test had some other semantics, but no need to discuss further.