ending with 8 players(dp/flex)

Little Jimmy · #1 (**permalink**) Sat Feb 14, 2004, 10:43pm

I may be leaving myself open to something obvious but what the heck. Fed rules. 10 total players on the team. Coach uses DP/Flex. DP bats 3rd. In the second inning the 4th batter is injured and cannot return. Flex cannot take that spot so one hole in the order, automatic out. Now 9 players in the game. Later the 5th batter becomes injured and cannot return, leaving the team with 8 players ( but two holes in the lineup ). Fed 4-3-1 g says (paraphrasing) game can end with 8 players (FP). My question is can the game continue with only seven batters? I don't see anything specifically stopping this. 3-3-6-f speaks of legally ending with 9 which seems contradictory. What am I missing?

Dakota · #2 (**permalink**) Sun Feb 15, 2004, 12:14am

Quote:

Originally posted by Little Jimmy
10 total players on the team. Coach uses DP/Flex.

Coach likes to take risks... or some might just say "DC". That DP musta been one heck of a stick and one awful glove to use DP/Flex with no subs available.

Quote:

Originally posted by Little Jimmy
DP bats 3rd. In the second inning the 4th batter is injured and cannot return. Flex cannot take that spot so one hole in the order, automatic out. Now 9 players in the game. Later the 5th batter becomes injured and cannot return, leaving the team with 8 players ( but two holes in the lineup ). Fed 4-3-1 g says (paraphrasing) game can end with 8 players (FP). My question is can the game continue with only seven batters?

No.

You have 8 players in the lineup, but only 7 on offense and 7 on defense. Sorry, coach, that's a forfeit.

Dukat · #3 (**permalink**) Sun Feb 15, 2004, 12:58am

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dakota

Quote:

You have 8 players in the lineup, but only 7 on offense and 7 on defense. Sorry, coach, that's a forfeit.

Since the FLEX and DP could play defense at the same time you would technically still have 8 defensively but since you still only have 7 offensively it doesn't matter like you said, still a forfeit. Correct?

IRISHMAFIA · #4 (**permalink**) Sun Feb 15, 2004, 09:45am

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dukat

Quote:

Originally posted by Dakota

Quote:

You have 8 players in the lineup, but only 7 on offense and 7 on defense. Sorry, coach, that's a forfeit.

Since the FLEX and DP could play defense at the same time you would technically still have 8 defensively but since you still only have 7 offensively it doesn't matter like you said, still a forfeit. Correct?

Speaking ASA, don't know about Fed, but assume it is similar if not the same. This is all dependent on the absence of the player is not caused by ejection.

Seven is never a possibility. As the ASA rule reads, a team can continue a game "with one less player that is currently in the line-up whenever a player leaves".

I read that to mean the if the FLEX is not in the batting order at the time, the team must finish the game with nine. If the FLEX has replaced the DP in the batting order when the player is missing, the team can finish with eight.

If the DP is out of the game at the time the team goes shorthanded and has a reentry available, she will report and re-enter the game immediately when a player must or opts to leave the game. If the DP elects not to report at that time, she remains ineligible for the remainder of the game.

Unless it was the FLEX (in the line-up on offense) who was the player leaving, an out should be declared whenever the batting position of the absent player is due to bat.

Little Jimmy · #5 (**permalink**) Sun Feb 15, 2004, 10:34am

I agree with Dakota that some coaches don't make the right decisions. And I also agree with Irish Mafia when he states that ASA speaks of continuing with "one less player". But Fed does not say that(at least that I can see). The only places I see this addressed is Fed 3-3-6 and 4-3-1 g which conflict with each other. Other than ASA as a reference where does Fed stop such a scenario from happening?

TexBlue · #6 (**permalink**) Sun Feb 15, 2004, 11:41am

When we had the TASO State Meeting, they had a clinic on the DP/FLEX. It was stated in no uncertain terms that Fed's rules were identical to ASA's. While I'm hoping this never happens on my field, I'm going with Mike. Let 'em play ball with 7, if they had the DP in when the removal occurred.

IRISHMAFIA · #7 (**permalink**) Sun Feb 15, 2004, 03:37pm

Quote:

Originally posted by TexBlue
When we had the TASO State Meeting, they had a clinic on the DP/FLEX. It was stated in no uncertain terms that Fed's rules were identical to ASA's. While I'm hoping this never happens on my field, I'm going with Mike. Let 'em play ball with 7, if they had the DP in when the removal occurred.

I'm sorry, but I stated and stand with seven is never a possibility. If you continue a game with seven, I believe you will lose the protest.

Dakota · #8 (**permalink**) Sun Feb 15, 2004, 04:55pm

If the team drops to 7 on defense, and the DP is still in the game (or has a re-entry available), they may continue by having the DP play defense for one of the absent players. This gives them 8 on the field.

They cannot continue, under any circumstances, with only 7 on either offense or defense.

While the shorthanded rule has not caught up with the DP/Flex addition, clearly the rule is written for the possiblity of only one vacant position in the batting order.

Quoting from the 2003 book (assuming it is the same in 2004 - I don't have my '04 book yet)...

NFHS Rule 4-3 ART.1 ...

Quote:

g. A team shall be allowed to finish a game with 8 players (F.P.)... with an out being called in that spot of the batting order. If that player has safely reached base ...

I would not allow a game to continue with only 7 in the field or with only 7 in the order.

If the coach wants to protest, fine.

Little Jimmy · #9 (**permalink**) Sun Feb 15, 2004, 05:24pm

Thanks to all. I think I could sell Dakotas' explanation (AN out, THAT player)to any reasonable coach (an oxymoron?).

whiskers_ump · #10 (**permalink**) Sun Feb 15, 2004, 07:13pm

LJ,

The 2004 book has the same reference as Tom quoted.
It is also mentioned in 3-3-8

CecilOne · #11 (**permalink**) Mon Feb 16, 2004, 05:20pm

No way can a team still play with two players gone from the original. The rule (NFHS Rule 4-3 ART.1.g) specifically refers to the batting order. Yes the book could be clearer, but what's new.

Also, the DP/FLEX rules in the ASA and NFHS books are no where near being identical; although I can't find any difference in application. IOW, the same lineup and moves can be done; but the words are different.

TexBlue · #12 (**permalink**) Mon Feb 16, 2004, 06:04pm

Yeah, that's where I was going with the "identical" quote. I never even checked the wording, word for word, I was just telling what the gal at State told us. As near as I could remember, the use of the DP/FLEX was the same for both ASA and Fed.

IRISHMAFIA · #13 (**permalink**) Mon Feb 16, 2004, 06:21pm

Quote:

Originally posted by CecilOne

Also, the DP/FLEX rules in the ASA and NFHS books are no where near being identical; although I can't find any difference in application. IOW, the same lineup and moves can be done; but the words are different.

Why would you expect anything different from NFHS? They adopt an ASA rule and screw around with it and then cannot figure out why people have problems with it. It works in ASA, so why would anyone change it?

I firmly believe there are some serious egos in Fed that need to go for the sake of the HS game.

JMHO,

Roger Greene · #14 (**permalink**) Tue Feb 17, 2004, 07:04am

[QUOTE]Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
[B]

Quote:

Originally posted by CecilOne

I firmly believe there are some serious egos in Fed that need to go for the sake of the HS game.

JMHO,

And we all know there are no egos connected with ASA, don't we, Mike. d

(Sorry. It was too good an opening to miss, Mike.)

Roger

CecilOne · #15 (**permalink**) Tue Feb 17, 2004, 01:17pm

I predicted months ago that copy and paste was out of the question; and also have said that "almost the same" can be more problem than no similarity. However, the NFHS wording is simpler and might be easier to deal with as we go along; especially for "faculty" coaches.

But I also went out on a limb and said "can't find any difference in application". It would be to the benefit of all readers and others if we really try to find such differences; so I challenge all of you to find a situation that would be different in the ASA vs. NFHS rules.