Originally posted by mick:

<B> An answer can only be guessed.


Some factors to be evaluated:

Team records.

Future meeting of the teams.

Cost and location of completion.

Score at point of protest.

Game situation of re-start.

Who will umpire.
__________________________________________________ _________
</B>

Now, in my opinion, all these factors are irrelevant to the decision of a protest. The BR simply has to be safe despite team records or future meetings or any of the aforementioned factors.

Besides, in Texas there are no protests in NFHS. Which is why you simply <B> have </B> to try to resolve it as fairly as possible. It wouldn't be so bad if this wrong call didn't end the game.

Here I am again on this. The ASA will not allow a protest on a play that failed to "conclude" because of the Umpire.
If it concluded, and a rule was botched it is protestable.
Thus on this play the BR is out.
Even if the ASA changed the application of a protest to allow one in this situation, the game would go back to a full count on the batter.
The BR would never be awarded first, so I cannot find clause for allowing that.
Thus I go back to my 1st response and say I wish we "would" allow a protest, and fix it right then and there.

And, you know this how? The only thing I see in Rule 9 is ASA will not allow a protest on anything that purely involves the accuracy of the umpire's judgment.This presupposes you are finding a "clause" to disallow the protest on the grounds the umpire screwed up very badly, instead of just badly. Again, where are you finding these clauses? Is there more written on allowed / disallowed protests than Rule 9? POE 41? Case Book section 9?Since you've morphed this over to ASA, using 10-6C (very similar to the NFHS 10-2-3m), how would you fix this? That is the real question, isn't it?

Originally posted by chuck chopper:

<B> Here I am again on this. The ASA will not allow a protest on a play that failed to "conclude" because of the Umpire.
If it concluded, and a rule was botched it is protestable.
Thus on this play the BR is out.
__________________________________________________ _________

</B>

I've looked in Rule 9 and the POE's. Where does it say that?
<B> __________________________________________________ _______

Even if the ASA changed the application of a protest to allow one in this situation, the game would go back to a full count on the batter.
The BR would never be awarded first, so I cannot find clause for allowing that.
__________________________________________________ ________
</B>

This is another solution I hadn't considered. It wouldn't place a tying run at 3rd, instead of 2nd. And you have the same batter, ( and not possibly a much better or worse one ) at the plate. So, I guess this is your "do over" solution? This would also take away the possibility of the catcher not making a good throw to 1st and allowing the runners to advance. You've taken away all the unpredictable possibilities except for a pitcher throwing a strike or ball and the batter's actions at the time of the pitch. Although I can't think of anywhere in the rule book where you can permit a "do over" I still think ASA's 10-6-c would prevail here and, by my interpretation, place the BR at 1st. But, like I said, your solution, if allowable, puts the situation in an almost identical situation as before the blown call.

Might work, might work, if you can convince the coaches the pitch never happened.

Dakota, looks like you and I were typing at the same time. And thinking the same way on allowing the protest.