Courtesy Runner

[whiskers_ump]

NFHS verus ASA Courtesy Runners

NFHS Game -
Bottom of 5th coach announces pinch-hitter and replacement
player for pitcher. [one in same]. Pinch-hitter doubles.
Coach calls time and wants to use CR for the pinch-hitter
who is now his pitcher. CR is allowed by umpires. Was
this correct or is the NFHS rule same as the ASA rule, that
CR can only enter for the last player who physically
played either cather or pitcher in previous inning?
Bookless and clueless at this point. However, do not think
that the rules are the same. MBW though.

thanks,
glen

[IRISHMAFIA]

2001 NFHS Rules

You are correct. There is nothing in rule 8.5.1, nor 2.10.1, which would prevent the coach from using a courtesy runner in your scenario. Now the sticky problem occurs when the team takes the field and the substitute does not go in to pitch.

Apparently, this has not happened in Fed yet or coaches would be screaming for an ammendment to the rule.

Mike

[bluezebra]

Glen:

This is from the FED site:

"2001 NFHS Softball Rules Interpretations

CASE BOOK

2. Page 58, 8.5.1 SITUATION L, replace the RULING with: This would be legal as long as F1 is the pitcher of record. COMMENT: The pitcher or catcher of record would be the player who occupied that position last on defense. In the first half inning, it would be the player listed on the line up card since the team has not played defense yet."

The courtesy runner may be used ONLY for the pitcher or cather of RECORD unless they haven't taken the field yet. Therefore, the answer is no. A pinch hitter is NOT the pitcher of record.

Bob

[whiskers_ump]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bluezebra
[B]Glen:

This is from the FED site:

"2001 NFHS Softball Rules Interpretations

CASE BOOK

2. Page 58, 8.5.1 SITUATION L, replace the RULING with: This would be legal as long as F1 is the pitcher of record. COMMENT: The pitcher or catcher of record would be the player who occupied that position last on defense. In the first half inning, it would be the player listed on the line up card since the team has not played defense yet."

The courtesy runner may be used ONLY for the pitcher or cather of RECORD unless they haven't taken the field yet. Therefore, the answer is no. A pinch hitter is NOT the pitcher of record.

Bob

----------------------------------------------------------
Bob,
Thanks for the information. I now have my rule book for
2001 NFHS unpacked. I do not at this time have a 2001 Case
book. I have contacted an umpire from another chapter that
I will be working with this weekend to bring me one. I was
not aware of the rule being same as ASA. Our chapter did
not distribute Case Books, and I am finding out what a
disadvantage that can be. I also note that from Mikes reply
he had same thoughts that I did. So angain Thanks,

glen

[whiskers_ump]

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
2001 NFHS Rules

You are correct. There is nothing in rule 8.5.1, nor 2.10.1, which would prevent the coach from using a courtesy runner in your scenario. Now the sticky problem occurs when the team takes the field and the substitute does not go in to pitch.

Apparently, this has not happened in Fed yet or coaches would be screaming for an ammendment to the rule.

Mike

Mike,

Thanks for replying. I see you were under same opinion that
I was. I do not have a case book for 2001. [which I have
found out is a definate disadvantage]

See bluezebra's reply to my post. I am glad situation did
happend in this fall-ball and not regular scheduled season
games. Could have, noooooo - would have gotten most
embarrassing with some of the coaches I have to face.

glen

[IRISHMAFIA]

While the ruling is basically the same, the only problem with using 8.5.1 Situation L has the coach announcing F1 as a re-entry for the PH. Therefore, F1 was indeed the pitcher of record, thus eligible for a CR.

The portion which Bob cited must have been a post-publication change as the 2001 Case Book doesn't read as Bob posted.

[bluezebra]

"While the ruling is basically the same, the only problem with using 8.5.1 Situation L has the coach announcing F1 as a re-entry for the PH. Therefore, F1 was indeed the pitcher of record, thus eligible for a CR.

The portion which Bob cited must have been a post-publication change as the 2001 Case Book doesn't read as Bob posted."
__________________

1..The CR was put in for the pinch hitter. The pinch hitter is NOT the pitcher of record. F1 cannot be accepted as a re-entry until the team goes back on defense.

2..Exactly. It's taken from the FED site, and further clarifies the Case book ruling.

Bob

[whiskers_ump]

Bob & Mike,

I am going to try and straighten out this mess I created on my
1st post. ASA & NFHS courtesy runner rules are same. Since 1st post I have
reviewed rules in the NFHS rule book that were not available to me previously.

In the 2001 NFHS rule book 8.5.1 would not alter my originial post. However, NFHS
did put out a change to the case book on the ruling of 8.5.1 Sit. L.- Sit L Reads -
S1 pinch hits for F1 and reaches base. S1's coach informs the
umpire that F1 is going to re-enter for S1 and then Jones will be
a CR for F1. OLD RULING: Once S1 pinch hits for F1,
the option to use a courtesy runner for F1 was lost, because S1 was
not the pitcher. The right to use a courtesy runner applies to the
pitcher and/or catcher of record.

NEW RULING:

" Page 58, 8.5.1 SITUATION L, replace the RULING with: This would be legal
as long as F1 is the pitcher of record. COMMENT: The pitcher or catcher of
record would be the player who occupied that position last on defense.
In the first half inning, it would be the player listed on the line
up card since the team has not played defense yet.

In my scenario, PH was not pitcher of record, so umpires were
wrong in allowing CR. However, just by review of a 2001 NFHS Rule
Book, you would not have known this. Neither would you have this
info if you did not have changes to the Case Book, which I did
not. Did not even have case book, thanks to my chapter, but we will
this coming year, and will surf internet to find any changes.

Thanks guys,

glen

[Dakota]

I sympathize with your situation. Without the casebook you don't get "The Rest of the Story" (c) Paul Harvey

We are only provided the rule book (ASA), but I purchase the casebook on my own.

[Steve M]

Here in Pa, we get both rule book & case book. I just assumed that all states did that.

[Skahtboi]

I, too, thought that everybody got the rulebook and the casebook. We do in Texas.

[whiskers_ump]

Originally posted by Skahtboi
I, too, thought that everybody got the rulebook and the casebook. We do in Texas.

Originally posted by Steve M
Here in Pa, we get both rule book & case book. I just assumed that all states did that.
__________________________________________________ __________
Steve, Skahtboi,

We normally do, but really had a mess up this past year. We did
not even test until Jan. Then when the packages came in,
person in charge was gone and it took forever to just get
the rule books. Have either of you already registered? I
understand all that is suppose take place in September. We
lost our President and Secretary. BTW Skahtboi, I am located
in East Texas.

glen

[whiskers_ump]

Originally posted by Dakota
I sympathize with your situation. Without the casebook you don't get "The Rest of the Story" (c) Paul Harvey

We are only provided the rule book (ASA), but I purchase the casebook on my own.

That is all we are provided in ASA. In NFHS we are suppose
to be furnished both. However, we had big problems this
past year.

glen

[Steve M]

As for testing, once you pass the test in Pa your first year, you never have to take it again - for Fed or ASA. I understand that many other states require a passed test each year.

In my case, since I don't generally do all that well with written tests, I prefer that. But I do see the value in making sure that everyone is in the book enough to kow & apply the rules.

[whiskers_ump]

Originally posted by Steve M
As for testing, once you pass the test in Pa your first year, you never have to take it again - for Fed or ASA. I understand that many other states require a passed test each year.

In my case, since I don't generally do all that well with written tests, I prefer that. But I do see the value in making sure that everyone is in the book enough to know & apply the rules.

That is not a bad idea. There are a lot of individuals
that cannot take written test. They have some sort of a
phobia and fear that they will not do well and usually do
not. However, they usually have as good or a better under-
standing of whatever the subject than some people that
ace written test. Everyone of this and other forums that
Steve M. has posted on, is aware that he is in the book
and on top of the rules.

glen