Play

[mcrowder]

Originally posted by BretMan
MC:

Conversely, I can find no rule that says an improper batter assumes the count of a proper batter who has not completed her at bat.

OK, I'm sorry - but this is just silly. You can also not find a rule that if B2 goes to the dugout to change bats, when she returns to the batters box she must assume the count from when she had the original bat. It's assumed. Balls and strikes don't just disappear because the personnel has changed.

You will find no rules that I'm aware of that even mention the term "assume the count". It's assumed. Previous counts to batters don't just disappear unless the inning ends. You'd need to have a rule or ruling to show why a count would vaporize.

Take this scenario to the extreme... B2 goes into the box, gets 2 strikes on her. B2 exits the field and B3 takes her place. Next pitch is a strike. Do you have a strikeout? Of course you do. The pitcher threw 3 strikes. Whether the substitution was legal, illegal, or just out of order, the previous count doesn't just go poof.

If the offensive manager sends in a sub for a batter with a 3-2 count on them, it's 3-2 when that batter takes their place in the box. No rule says this, it's common sense.

In this case, as any other, from the pitcher's point of view, it's 3-2. New batter? So what. Still 3-2.

Originally posted by BretMan
If it's the latter, then I would be tempted to bring B2 back to the plate to resume with a 3-2 count, which seems like a fair fix. And I'm still leaving R1 at second!

Why? How is this fair? What if the pitch was a strike, not a ball? The pitcher has now thrown 3 strikes. You're penalizing the defense for offensive mistakes or shenanigans.

PS - I'm leaving R1 at 2nd as well. No matter what you rule, I can't see any reason to put R1 back.