Courtesy runner

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by benbret

NFHS Fast pitch. Pitcher is batting in the number one spot and she is lead off batter in top of the 4th inning. She gets a single. Coach puts in courtesy runner. 2nd batter in number two spot gets put out. 3rd batter in number 3 spot walks. 4th batter in number nine spot strikes out. Nobody said anything. 5th batter in number 1 spot which is the pitcher walks. Bases loades and two out. Coach wants to use another courtesy runner for pitcher. The first courtesy runner is on 3rd base. I said he could not use another courtesy runner but I was not postive. What is the rule?

I'm going to try to step throught this. Let's see how it goes. There is no rule for this situation. The book does not anticipate a batter due up to bat while her CR is still on base.

At the point the first pitch is thrown to B1's second at bat, B9's at bat is legal, meaning B1 is the legitimate batter. Up to now, if anything was to be done, it required an appeal from the defense. B1 gets on base and the coach requests a CR. This should cause PU to get out his line up card and notice that:

B1 had already had one CR during this inning, and that CR is still on base.

While BOO requires an appeal, illegal substitute does not. However, to ding B1 as an illegal sub, the umpire would need to have noticed this before B9's at bat became legal. Since B9's at bat is legal, the next player due up is B1, so she is not substituting for anyone - she is batting for herself in her legal position in the order.

B1 is not re-entering for her CR, she has just completed a new, legal, at bat.

I think this is a nothing. Even if the defense now appeals, there is nothing to appeal. The team just got away with skipping the bottom of their order (except for B9, of course).

What do you think?

[CecilOne]

All that is correct and accepted.

The other Q is applies to mc's example of "If BOO, subsequently legitimized, causes a player already on base to be the proper batter, said batter is skipped. In this case, if B9 batted and was not appealed for BOO, the next batter is B1 (F1 in this case) - who TECHNICALLY is still on base, thus making B2 the proper batter (still on base too, you say? Then B3). Isn't, then, F1 not just BOO, but an illegal substitute for B2?"

If there was no CR, and the BOO of B9 was not appealed, B1 and B2 are still on base, so is B3 the correct batter?

[CecilOne]

The other Q is applies to mc's example of "If BOO, subsequently legitimized, causes a player already on base to be the proper batter, said batter is skipped. In this case, if B9 batted and was not appealed for BOO, the next batter is B1 (F1 in this case) - who TECHNICALLY is still on base, thus making B2 the proper batter (still on base too, you say? Then B3). Isn't, then, F1 not just BOO, but an illegal substitute for B2?"

If there was a CR, and the BOO of B9 was not appealed, does the CR being on base count as B1 still on base (also B2), so is B3 the correct batter?

If that is true and B1 bats again after B9, given that B3 is the "correct batter" is it now BOO or nothing?

[Dakota]

Upon further review...

B1 can never be an illegal sub for batting while her CR is still on base. The reason is, she never left the game, so she is not a sub of any kind, legal or illegal.

The argument that the legal batter due up is B3 after the first pitch to B1 seems to me to be valid. However, to enforce this requires an appeal of BOO by the defense before a pitch is thrown to B3 (who, persumably will now come up to bat).

Lacking an appeal, I think we still have nothing, and the CR should be allowed, assuming the CR is otherwise legal to be a CR for the pitcher.