FLEX batting

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by JefferMC

... What would happen if she hits fairly and gets on base I'm still muddy on.

She is out and the play is nullified, (but any outs made stand) if detected before the next pitch.

Originally Posted by JefferMC

And/or any additional penalties on the batter or coach (ejection?)

No, other than what I said in the post above.

[cpa]

To clarify my initial scenario -- the #1 hitter is not the DP -- that would be too easy

My main question is -- since we have an offensive sub for the #1 hitter, albeit an illegal one, does the #1 hitter have to burn her re-entry if she comes back in the game?

Seems most folks are saying yes

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by cpa

My main question is -- since we have an offensive sub for the #1 hitter, albeit an illegal one, does the #1 hitter have to burn her re-entry if she comes back in the game?

Yes.........

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by Dakota

She is out and the play is nullified, (but any outs made stand) if detected before the next pitch. No, other than what I said in the post above.

Tom, I disagree. NFHS 3-4-2.b, when discovered before the next pitch, play is nullified (all outs stand), illegal sub is out, illegal sub is restricted, B1 does not lose her turn at bat (illegal sub supercedes BOO, even though both occured). NFHS 3-4-2.c, when discovered after a pitch, play stands, but illegal sub is out if still on base, and illegal sub is restricted.

The restriction is occasionally overlooked because it is listed separately for all subsections of Article 2; but an illegal sub remains illegal whenever she is discovered, and must always be restricted and replaced with a legal sub.

[Dakota]

Steve, I referred to my earlier post where I stated she was restricted.

Also, I disagree that both BOO and illegal sub occurred, since they are mutually exclusive in the situation of the FLEX batting for a non-DP. It is not considered a sub for the DP, but batting out of order. It is considered an illegal sub for the #1 batter, batting in the correct order.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Steve, I referred to my earlier post where I stated she was restricted.

Also, I disagree that both BOO and illegal sub occurred, since they are mutually exclusive in the situation of the FLEX batting for a non-DP. It is not considered a sub for the DP, but batting out of order. It is considered an illegal sub for the #1 batter, batting in the correct order.

How can she be BOO when she wasn't in the batting order to start?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

How can she be BOO when she wasn't in the batting order to start?

It can't. Which is what he said. It's not. It's illegal sub. Again - which is what he said.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

It can't. Which is what he said. It's not. It's illegal sub. Again - which is what he said.

I know it is not, but this was the statement to which I was referring:

It is not considered a sub for the DP, but batting out of order.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I know it is not, but this was the statement to which I was referring:

It is not considered a sub for the DP, but batting out of order.

I seem to be having problems communicating in this thread...

I meant, "It is NOT considered a sub for the DP who is batting out of order. It is instead considered an illegal sub for the #1 batter who is batting in the correct order."

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

B1 does not lose her turn at bat ...

Why not? See case plays 3.4.2 A & B.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Why not? See case plays 3.4.2 A & B.

Good. Thank you. I didn't research it, and simply read the ruling. Rule book Penalty clearly states proper batter loses time at bat in 2a (when still at bat or after making an out and no pitch has been thrown; but ignores (and therefore I incorrectly assumed that is not the case) in 2b and 2c. It makes much more sense that the proper batter must be skipped in all cases.

As to disagreeing, I misread your post; I think you might, in retrospect see how it might be misconstrued. When you said no other penalties other than as in post above, I simply referred to your statement in the same post, but above this statement. In there, you simply called the player out and play nullified.

Finally, to all:

The language that BOO is superceded appears in the 2005 NFHS rulebook Penalty to 3-4-2b. At some point, the argument that an illegal sub other than FLEX batting in the nonexistent 10th position can be considered BOO; again, I was rushed, threw out my first answer from an older reference without full research. It also seemed to try to explain my reading that BOO is superceded.

My apologies; I did make many of you think further!!

To the original, singular question in the OP; in all cases of an illegal sub, the original player has left the game, and must reenter, or else another legal sub must be used.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

I think you might, in retrospect see how it might be misconstrued. When you said no other penalties other than as in post above, I simply referred to your statement in the same post, but above this statement. In there, you simply called the player out and play nullified.

I didn't word it the best, I know. Just got lazy.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Just remembered the reason for "supercedes" language.

A noted rules person argued at one time that we could consider the FLEX batting in an incorrect position (other than the DP's) as 1) an unreported sub (remember the language that the FLEX batting for the DP in not a substitution?? Therefore, did not need to be reported??) who then bats out of order. This would effectively eliminate the restriction (ejection in ASA). For several years, the language was added to make sure 3-4-2 was applied, not BOO.

Now, the rule 3-3-6g points to 3-4 for penalty (did not previously).