Another Batting out of Order Question

[LMan]

Yes. Improper batter removed from 1B. Proper batter declared out. All other batters returned to bases at TOP.

In this case, you end up with bases loaded again (where you started), 1 out, new proper batter at the plate, improper batter now in dugout getting chewed out by coach

[UmpireErnie]

Mom, what date is on your NFHS rule book? The wording in my 2006 book is different than what you posted. I am quoting from page 56 under 7-1-2 PENALTY (not EFFECT) starting in paragraph 2 about halfway down the page..

“The umpire shall declare the batter who should have batted out (not the improper batter). The improper batter’s time at bat is negated and she is returned to the bench/dugout area. All runners who were not declared out must return to the base occupied at the time of the pitch.”

Hence the ruling that LMan gave above.

[IRISHMAFIA]

[QUOTE=UmpireErnie]The umpire shall declare the batter who should have batted out (not the proper batter). [QUOTE]

Isn't the "batter who should have batted" and "the proper batter" the same individual?

[CecilOne]

[QUOTE=IRISHMAFIA][QUOTE=UmpireErnie]The umpire shall declare the batter who should have batted out (not the proper batter).

Isn't the "batter who should have batted" and "the proper batter" the same individual?

I thnink tht's cvalled a typo.

[UmpireErnie]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Isn't the "batter who should have batted" and "the proper batter" the same individual?

Glad you have my back, partner! I fixed the post.

[justmom]

Originally Posted by UmpireErnie

Mom, what date is on your NFHS rule book? The wording in my 2006 book is different than what you posted. I am quoting from page 56 under 7-1-2 PENALTY (not EFFECT) starting in paragraph 2 about halfway down the page..

“The umpire shall declare the batter who should have batted out (not the improper batter). The improper batter’s time at bat is negated and she is returned to the bench/dugout area. All runners who were not declared out must return to the base occupied at the time of the pitch.”

Hence the ruling that LMan gave above.

My book is 2004. Thanks for the info. I must have missed that in the updates!

[justmom]

Does anybody know when they changed the language of this rule? I can't find anything about a revision, but it must have happened in 2005 or 2006.

[WestMichBlue]

Originally Posted by justmom

Does anybody know when they changed the language of this rule? I can't find anything about a revision, but it must have happened in 2005 or 2006.

Justmom - email me and I will provide the full rule and changes and why. They occured over several years.

WMB
[email protected]