Unreported Sub
 

ASA SP League Play-offs

Team A starts the game with 10 players. During the top of the 2nd, I notice the catcher motioning to the dugout about something. After a 3-up, 3-down inning, the teams change sides and as the base coach is coming across the field, he informs me that the first batter of the inning was actually the 11th batter and ask if the batter had of reached base and they appealed, would we have had an out. I replied that we would have had more than an out.

Seems that the coach decided to add the 11th batter (who was late) without informing either the other team and/or myself. I looked at my lineup card to verify that there were only 10 players listed (there were) and then approached the coach. He stated that since they had not batted through the line-up, he did not think that it was a problem. I assured him that it WAS a problem.

After confering with my BU, I could not recall a reason to disqualify the player as the teams had already changed sides and the player was not playing defense. I advised the coach that the next time through the line-up he should only use the 10 batters listed on the original line-up.

After the lead-off batter bats in the top of the 4th, the other coach appeals that they batted out of order since the 11th batter did not bat. I advised him that he should have appealed the first time (when the player was at bat or immediately after). Since he failed to do so, they got away with it but were still obligated to only bat the 10 players in the line-up.

After getting home and reviewing the book, it seems that an argument could be made that we got it both right and wrong... 4-6-C-4 states "An unreported substitute is discovered after completing their turn at bat and AFTER the next pitch, legal or illegal, or before the defense had left the field of play." As the coach mentioned it clearly after the defense had left the field, it seems as if I got it right.

However, 4-6-C-1 states that an sub who enters the game is an unreported sub "after a pitch, legal or illegal, or a play is made". That makes me believe that I should have disqualifed the player. I think that this rule covers any unreported subs while the first one only covers a specific instance.

What would you have done in this situation?

If I'm reading you right, this is an illegal player (an EP added to the lineup after the lineup became official), not an unreported sub. Penalty is the same, though, and I believe the player should have been DQed, but since the team had left the field, no other concequences.

Illegal Player???
 

Illegal Player??? The Illegal Players listed in 4-6-G does not include a provision for this situation. Not sure how this would handled but it could get ugly quickly. For example, B11 was unreported sub for B1, B1 was then an Illegal Re-Entry for B2, B2 was then an Illegal Re-Entry for B3. We would disqualify B11, B1 and B2. B3 could then re-enter into the third slot. But now, the team has less than 9 players and is forced to forfeit. Don't know if this is right, just a theory that seems very harsh.

I took this to mean he was adding an EP to bat 11. If that is what he was doing, that was an illegal player, not an unreported sub. Whatever, the penalty is the same.

An unreported sub must come into the game for another player. That is not the case here.

Rule 1. Illegal Player- A player who takes a position in the line-up, either on offense or defense, who does not have a legal right to the position.

Rule 4.4.A addresses this situation. Since the EP was not on the line-up card nor made known to the umpire prior to the start of the game, the team was not permitted, by rule, to use an EP.

Based on 4.6.F.Effect, the Illegal Player should have been DQd when the opposing coach raised the BOO. Yes, the BOO is not a complaint about an IP, but would have caused the discovery of the IP.

Now I get it....
 

Sorry if I was vague in what I had written, but you are correct. He added an EP to bat in the 11th position.

Thanks for the rules reference. I had looked at 4-6 but it doesn't mention the added EP being an IP. However, had I looked at 4-4 it does. I knew that I could count on you guys to provide the correct ruling. Thanks.