|
Wed Apr 06, 2005, 05:01am
|
|||
|
|||
|
This scenario was posed as part of the NZ Rule exam. I am curious to see how you would have answered.
Batting line up is B1, B2, B3 etc. In the bottom of the seventh innings, with the game score tied up, B5 hits safely. B6 hits into a double play (B5 is played out at second and B6 is played out at first), for two outs. Neither batter 7 nor batter 8 have been batting very well in the game so the coach elects to bat B9 in place of the correct batter. B9 is subsequently struck out for the third out of the innings. Before the defence leave the infield the coach appeals for B9 batting out of order. Would you as the plate umpire allow the appeal? If so, who is the third out of the innings?, If not why not? Who is the first batter for the next innings? And who is the runner that starts at second base for the tie-breaker innings? New Zealand uses ISF rules which for the most part align with your ASA. 
|
|
Wed Apr 06, 2005, 06:13am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
which has B7 out for batting out of order. B8 is the lead off hitter for the next inning and B7 is placed at second for the international tie breaker. [Edited by scottk_61 on Apr 6th, 2005 at 07:16 AM]
__________________
ISF ASA/USA Elite NIF
|
|
Wed Apr 06, 2005, 06:21am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Since we never want to take an out off the books allow all.
B10 or B1 is 1st batter next inning, & B9 goes to 2nd.
|
|
Wed Apr 06, 2005, 07:30am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Am I right on this Jel?
__________________
Ed ASA, NFHS
|
|
Wed Apr 06, 2005, 08:03am
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
[b][quote]
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|
|
Wed Apr 06, 2005, 08:05am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
By allowing B9 to be the last out, you have rewarded the team which intentionally violated the rules.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|
|
Wed Apr 06, 2005, 09:02am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
This case has a proper appeal, Mike has the proper answer. The coach took a gamble and lost.
|
|
Wed Apr 06, 2005, 09:16am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Anytime I can sit and discuss softball AND eat all the donuts I want, it's cool! We had 2 new guys there, (one was a girl though) and even though we didn't get a chance to do any on field work, the rules sessions and mingling with other umpires really helped them as well. One remarked to me later, "Boy, I have a lot to learn". Don't we all!
|
|
Wed Apr 06, 2005, 11:32am
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
No out taken.......... Oh I see, Mike has addressed this already. Man, Chuck, you must not have been awake this morning when you answered this one. Lets make this one a mulligan.
__________________
ISF ASA/USA Elite NIF
|
|
Wed Apr 06, 2005, 03:57pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
More info needed
NZ,
could you explain a little more...I even sent your question out to a Kiwi (Mark Anderton) and he couldn't tell me...I think what you are asking is you would recognize a fourth out - which might prevent a run from scoring - but wanted to be sure that's what you were asking about.
__________________
John An ucking fidiot
|
|
Wed Apr 06, 2005, 08:41pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
bkbjones - more info reqd
We have three outs already.
The double play on B5 & B6. And also the strikeout on B9. Yet I am reading umpires giving an out on B7 for failing to bat also. That's 4 outs. I am only aware of accepting an appeal for an additional out to remove a run - yet no run has scored in this scenario. [Edited by nzumpire on Apr 6th, 2005 at 09:43 PM]
|
|
Wed Apr 06, 2005, 10:34pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: bkbjones - more info reqd
Quote:
You can look at this play two ways. ISF 10.1.n instructs an umpire not to apply a ruling which would benefit the offending team. Or, as a matter of rule(ISF 7.2.c&d, ASA 7.2.C), the defense took full advantage of the appeal process afforded them to appeal when the offense bats out of order.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|
|
Thu Apr 07, 2005, 02:52am
|
|||
|
|||
|
ISF Rule 7 Sec 2d Effect 2b states:
" ... Any out that is mnade prior to discovering this infraction, remains out." Hence the out on B9 stays - He is the 3rd out of the innings. Further, ISF Rule 8 Sec 9j Effect 4 states: "Additional out appeals can be made after the third out as long as it is made properly and are made to remove a run." There is no run being removed here, so it is not applicable to accepting the appeal. In our game, it is not only the players but also the coaches who are getting smarter. In this scenario, the defence coach realised batting out of order was the play. He too took a chance that B9 would not be out, prior to the appeal. Undoubtedly if B9 had hit the ball over the fence, the appeal would have disallowed the runs and B7 would have been declared out (as many of you were quick to point out) and the tie-breaker would have seen B8 in the box with B7 on 2nd base. To take the "easy" way out and quote R10 Sec 1n would not help you when the protest was lodged. I'm sure you will debate this until the cows come home but, we kiwis are having to get as smart as our World Series winning coaches.
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
