Play

[IRISHMAFIA]

R1, no outs, 2-2 count on batter.

R1 off with the pitch. Umpire calls the pitch a ball and the throw to 2nd is late.

B2 thought pitch was a strike and walked to the dugout. BU up 3B line a little watching play at 2B and did not notice ODB stepping in the BB. On the next pitch, umpire rules ball four and awards B3 first base.

As B3 trots to 1B, here comes the defense's manager. What are you going to do?

[AtlUmpSteve]

Without looking for a casebook ruling, here's my "off the cuff" response. I reject "abandonment" as a ruling, since no one made that call when it happened, and I won't apply that after the fact (nor can we back into it; if we noticed, no one would have ruled the next pitch ball four). I reject a do-over; the offensive coaches needed to be accountable for the batter knowing the situation, same as being responsible for runners knowing the count.

I believe my ruling is batting out of order; same as if B3 had the complete turn at bat for B2, B3 completed the at bat.

[wadeintothem]

My knee jerk response..
B3 did abandon her turn at plate and PUs brain fart not withstanding...

I got b3 out for abandoning her turn at bat / new pitch was made to new batter afterwards, B4 at bat with 1-0 count.

------------------------------------

after digging around and specifically researching AltUmps BOO ruling.. i muddied the water for myself..

I only have my ASA2004 book.. 2005 ran away or something.. anyway in ASA 2004 .. it says 7-2-1

If BOO is discovered while the incorrect batter is at bat, the correct b atter must take the batters position and legally assume balls and strikes..

---------- It would seem to me that if you as PU play the BOO card, you get a "do over"..

Interesting case play.. I'll read others responses, i know in a game today i would have just called the batter out as that was my initial response here

---------------------------------

Hey its not our fault, all softball players look alike.

[tcannizzo]

This wouldn't happen in my game. Preventative umpiring would not have allowed B4 up to bat for ball four.

[mcrowder]

There's no way you can retroactively call B2 out, and rule a 1-0 count on B3. What if B3 had hit the ball. All actions by both teams would be based on an assumption regarding the number of outs - you can't go back and add an out.

B2 is allowed to go to the dugout during an at bat (perhaps she wanted a new helmet, bat, etc) - there's no abandonment here.

B2 can even be substituted for during an at bat. If B2 had actually been the wrong batter, and B3 the correct batter, offense can switch them with a 3-0 count without penalty.

So you have no grounds for an out on many levels. What you have is B3 completing this at-bat, and doing so out of order. Apply the BOO rules just as if B3 had taken all 4 pitches of this at bat. B2 is out for not batting, B3 is sent back to the plate with a 0-0 count, R1 is still on 2nd.

(Edited to correct player numbers)

[Edited by mcrowder on Feb 8th, 2006 at 11:10 AM]

[EdJW]

If B3 is the next batter in the lineup, B2 is out for abandoning her "at bat." And count on B3 is 1 -- 0.

If B3 is an unannounced substitute, she is out upon completion of her "at bat." This occurs when she is awarded first base with the BB. The defensive coach is required to bring the issue to the umpires, which the coach did in this scenario. Upon confirmation that B3 is an unannounced substitute, B3 is out.

If B3 is an announced substitute, she gets the BB.

B4? There is no B4 in this scenario.

[CelticNHBlue]

Is it me or did this sitch go way off base...

1 - There is no such thing as a do-over

2 - As Ed points out, where did B4 come from; not involved in this at all.

3 - This can only be either abandonment or BOO; there is no substitution issue to discuss, B3 was (assumed) already in the game and in the batting order.

4 - I agree that there is not abandonment in this scenario therefor we are left with BOO.

As this is BOO, the defense waited for the play to end, BB, and before the next pitch, legal or illegal, they have successfully appealed BOO and the correct batter, B2, is out, B3 takes her proper turn at bat with a new count and 1 out in the inning. And in case there was a question, R1 is allowed to remain at 2B from the steal. JMO

[CecilOne]

I'll go with BOO, as said, it's too late for abandonment anyway. B2 is just as out on BOO as B2 would have been on abandonment. B3 now bats with 0-0.


Why does B3 trot to 1st if she thought it was her first pitch?

If B3 stays at the plate, is the B2 turn-at-bat still completed, in terms of B2 returning and assuming the 4-2 count?

[mcrowder]

Sorry - I fixed the B3/B4 and B2/B3 errors in my above post. My bad.

The long and short is, this is BOO. B2 did nothing illegal, and can't be retroactively called out for abandonment. B3 batted out of order - treat it as such.

[mcrowder]

Originally posted by CecilOne
Why does B3 trot to 1st if she thought it was her first pitch?

Because the rookie umpire said, "Ball four, take your base!"

[BretMan]

Mike rarely offers a "what if/third world play" for our consideration, so when he does, you know it's going to be a good one!

I tried to tackle this one step at a time and was surprised at the answer I was led to.

1) B2 is the proper batter. She is the proper batter up until which time her at bat is completed- that is, until she is either retired or becomes a runner. Neither has happened here. It is still her time at bat.

2) B3 is an improper batter. She has assumed a position at bat before the preceding batter's turn at bat was completed.

3) B3 received one pitch- a "ball"- before the defensive manager approached the umpire. (I'm guessing that he then brought the improper batter to the umpire's attention. It doesn't really say that he did!)

4) What is the prescribed remedy when an incorrect batter is discovered before she has completed her at bat? The proper batter takes her place and assumes the same ball-strike count.

That would leave us with...

B2 being returned to the plate and assuming the incorrect batters count of 1-0?

Doesn't seem right, but if I take it step-by-step, that's where I end up.

And, of course, R1 remains at second. Her advance is legal and has no bearing on the outcome of this play.

A couple of "by the ways"...

- What is the "abandonment rule" that posters keep refering to? Please cite a rule number, because I don't see an "abandonment" rule in the book that covers this play.

- In as much as Mike's question is "what would you do" and not, "what would be the proper ruling" (maybe there isn't one?) what I might do if presented with this odd play on the field and having only a moment to sort things out, might wind up being something totally different than the logical deduction attempted above.

If there is no accepted ruling covered in the rules, then we might be in rule 10-1 territory!

- While it is easy to say, "This would never happen in my game", the fact is the chance of this happening in one of my games would be slim-to-none.

With a 2-2 count, most likely I have just given the count, both by hand and verbally. If the pitch is a "ball" it will be verbally announced. If it is a called strike, believe me the batter is going to know she was out!

As "asleep at the wheel" the umpires in this play seem to have been, the whole fiasco could have been prevented with the most basic of umpire "ball/strike" mechanics.

[mcrowder]

Bret, is there a rules reason for wiping out the count (3-2) accrued by B2 when B3 steps in? I can't find any support for this idea. To me, it's 3-2 when B3 steps in. When she takes a 4th ball, she is now a batter batting out of order who has completed her at bat (via a base on balls). When defensive manager points it out, B2 is out for failing to bat, and B3 is back at the plate, 0-0.

[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.

By what rule does B3- an improper batter- assume B2's 3-2 count?

Either there is an approved ruling for this play- which, hopefully, Mike will furnish- or we are at the mercy of rule 10-1, where "the plate umpire has the authority to make decisions on any situations not spefically covered in the rules".

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!

If there is an approved ruling, I suspect that when Mike supplies the answer most of us will be smacking our foreheads and saying, "D'oh! Why didn't I think of that!".

[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.

[CecilOne]

Originally posted by mcrowder

Because the rookie umpire said, "Ball four, take your base!"

Obviously, but is she sleeping or cheating? (amusement, not part of the case)