Unreported substitution, and then some
 

USSSA tournament. U-trip allows for an additional player in batting order.
At pre game conference, coach hands umpire line up showing 9 players with 1 sub.
Score keeper for team has a different line up showing all 10 players in batting order.
With no outs, substitution thinking she is in batting order goes to bat in the 8th position, gets on base.
#8 batter, which is the 9th position, then bats and gets on base.
#9 batter follows suit and bats in 1st position, gets double.
#1 batter bats in 2nd position, gets hit.
#2 batter assumes position in batters box.
Defensive coach, calls time, now decides to review original line up handed to him at pre game conference and questions substitution's at bat.
No outs at this time.
#9 batter at third base, #1 batter at second.
How many outs, who should be at bat, and why?

Don't know about U-trip, but if it is close to ASA, there are still no outs and #2 is still in box.

Why wouldn't someone be guilty of BOO?

And the beat goes on.....
 

Okay, assuming this game occurred after 8/1/2007 (Seventh Edition):

RULE 5 PLAYERS AND SUBSTITUTES
Sec. 1. PLAYERS A team shall consist of at least nine players, whose positions shall be
designated as; (1) Pitcher, (2) Catcher, (3) First Baseman, (4) Second Baseman, (5)
Third Baseman, (6) Short Stop, (7) Left Fielder, (8) Center Fielder, (9) Right Fielder, and
a designated hitter and/or up to two additional players.
A. A team must have the required number of players present in the dugout or team area
to start or continue a game.
B. The team’s lineup card shall include name, jersey number, position and batting order
of each starting player and should include each eligible substitute. Lineups become
official after they have been exchanged, verified and then accepted by the plate
umpire during the pregame conference. Eligible roster members may be added as substitutes at any time.

The correct lineup is the official lineup verified by the plate umpire at the pregame conference.

So, to reiterate the situation, we have 9 players and 1 sub, who we will name “Sub1”. Sub1 bats in the 8 spot, gets on base.
#8 batter bats in the 9 spot, gets on base.
#9 batter bats in the 1 spot, hits a double.
#1 batter bats in the 2 spot, gets a hit.
#2 batter enters batter’s box in the 3 spot. DC calls time, questions Sub1’s at bat?

RULE 5 PLAYERS AND SUBSTITUTES
Sec 5. SUBSTITUTE - A player who replaces a player that is in the game (offense or defense).
Teams are required to immediately report all substitutions to the plate umpire. Upon
notification by either team, the umpire shall announce the legal substitute and make the
appropriate lineup card changes. An unreported legal substitute brought to the umpire’s
attention will result in a penalty, all prior play shall stand.
PENALTY: For unreported substitution,
First offense: A team warning is issued.
Second offense: The manager is ejected, from the remainder of the game only.

Sub1 is now the legal player for the starter in the 8 spot.

Now, we definitely have(had) BOO. But look at Rule 9, Section 10, Subsection D.:

RULE 9. APPEALS Sec 10 Batting Out Of Order
A batter shall be called out on appeal when he fails to bat in his proper turn and another batter
completes a time at bat in his place.
NOTE: Only the defensive team may appeal out of order after the batter has completed
his time at bat.
A. When an improper batter becomes a runner or is put out and the defensive team
appeals to the umpire before the next pitch (legal or illegal), or before the infielders
leave the diamond if a half inning is ending. the umpire shall declare the proper batter
out and return all runners to the base occupied at the time of the pitch.
Exception: Any outs made on the play stand. An out for batting out of order
supersedes an out by the improper batter on a play.
NOTE: If a runner advances because of a stolen base, wild pitch or passed ball while
the improper batter is at bat, such advance is legal. B. If an improper batter becomes a runner or is put out and a legal or illegal pitch has
been delivered to the succeeding batter, or all infielders have left the diamond if a
half-inning has ended and, in all cases, before an appeal is made, the improper
batter becomes the proper batter and the results of his time at bat become legal.
C. When the proper batter is called out because he has failed to bat in turn, the next
batter shall be the batter whose name follows that of the proper batter who was
called out.
D. When an improper batter becomes a proper batter because no appeal is properly
made as above, the next batter shall be the batter whose name follows that of such
legalized improper batter. The instant an improper batter’s actions are legalized, the
batting order picks up with the name following that of the legalized improper batter.NOTE: When several players bat out of order before discovery so that a player’s time
at bat occurs while he is a runner, such player remains on base, but he is NOT out as
a batter.

Once #8 batted in the 9 spot and once a pitch was thrown, it all became legal.

“Sorry Coach, you should have caught it a couple of batters ago. All play stands.”
Boy, I would hate to be on that field, unless I haven’t fulfilled my quota of ejections for the year, because the DC is going to become unglued, or appeal the decision.

Quote:

Sub1 is now the legal player for the starter in the 8 spot.

But for Sub 1 to become a legal player, someone would have to leave the batter order. That did not happen.

Does U-trip cover an "illegal player" as opposed to an unreported sub?

Clarification
 

The affect of Sub1 coming into the game in the 8 spot would be as a substitute for "starter 8 spot". Next time they batted, they would bat....6 spot, 7 spot, Sub1 in the 8 spot, 9 spot, 1 spot, etc.....with "starter 8 spot" as the substitute.

USSSA does have an "illegal player" rule, but it only applies to starters/substitutes that re-enter in an incorrect batting position, or starters/substitutes that re-enter a second time, or using a pitcher that has been removed from the pitching position.

Then what is the status of Player #8 who batted after Sub1?

Scott,
I only have the 6th edition of the rules book.
Rule 6. Players and Substitutions.
Section 3.
The additional player if used MUST be selected prior to the start of the game, and her name must be included on the line up card presented to the umpire.
Failure to declare the additional player prior to the game precludes the use of an additional player in that game.
With that being the rule, wouldn't Sub 1 become an illegal player as soon as she batted since she should not be in the line up to start with?

Just downloaded the 7th Edition of USSSA rules.
An illegal player is defined as an original player or their substitute batting in an improper batting slot.
Doesn't this rule make original batter #8 becoming an illegal player?

SUB1 is unannounced sub for #8, becomes legal sub when play is resumed. #8 is out of game.

#8 is an illegal sub, re-entering the game in the wrong batting position (for #9). #9 is now out of game. When discovered, #8 is out and removed from game.

#9 is an illegal sub, re-entering the game in the wrong batting position (for #1). #1 is now out of game. When discovered, #9 is out and removed from game.

#1 is an illegal sub, re-entering the game in the wrong batting position (for #2). #2 is now out of game. When discovered, #1 is out and removed from game.

#2 is an illegal sub, re-entering the game in the wrong batting position (for #3). #3 is now out of game. When discovered, #2 is out and removed from game.

#3 can re-enter, is now at bat. But . . . . .

Don't have enough players to finish the game; forfeit. Let's go home!

WMB

IRISHMAFIA:

Q: Then what is the status of Player #8 who batted after Sub1?

A: I would treat Player #8 as BOO. I guess OC didn't tell her that she was not batting this inning.

gun308:

Q. … wouldn't Sub 1 become an illegal player as soon as she batted since she should not be in the line up to start with?

A: In pregame, coach gives me a lineup card with 9 starters and 1 sub. This is pretty typical of U trip, since they want to keep the sub for a courtesy runner. In this situation, I would say, “Okay coach, you have 9 starters and one sub, right?” I always wait for a reply, just in case they have given me the wrong lineup, or to just jog their memory that they have no AP or a DP/DH. Sub1 is not an illegal player, since the lineup card did not have an AP, only 9 starters. If Sub1 bats, she is a substitution, and in this instance an unreported substitution.

gun308:

Q. An illegal player is defined as an original player or their substitute batting in an improper batting slot.
Doesn't this rule make original batter #8 becoming an illegal player?


A: I would treat Sub1 as an unreported sub and Player #8 would be a starter, now on the bench, with a re-entry remaining.


WestMichBlue:

I like your take on the situation. 4 outs, only 6 players left, forfeit, ball game!!!

I don’t think I can use “Illegal Player” on this situation, since the lineup card only had 9 starters.

You should see the lineup cards we get at pregame. They look like NFHS or ASA lineups and U trip has rules that the DP/DH be on the same line on the lineup card. I have never seen anyone give me a lineup card with AP; coaches use EP. And I have never seen a U tip lineup card with the DH and DP on the same line; the “flex” (wrong term in U trip) is on the last line of the lineup card.

And this is why I have troubles with NFHS flex rules. :o

Scott,
You have stated that batter #8, when she bats is BOO. Right?
Sub1 is in game and #8 is in game, not on bench.
Back to my original question, #2 is at bat, with neither a legal nor illegal pitch being thrown.
Based on your senario, shouldn't player #1 be called out for BOO?

West Mich, I'm tending to agree with you on this one.
Not because it's an easy way to end the game but it makes the most sense.

The main problem with USSSA rule book is it entirely too vague in many aspects. A lot of possible rules with too few pages to expound on them.

WMB's analysis is the correct way to look at it. The open question is does U-trip provide a way that a single past error (S1 thinking they were B10) does not cascade into multiple penalties?

If any of these are BOO, then there is no violation anywhere, since once a pitch is thrown to the first player after the first BOO, the first BOO is now legal, and every player after that comes to bat in order. However, a player has to be IN the batting order to bat OUT of order.

S1 coming to bat has to be something other than BOO, since S1 is not in the batting order. There is no provision (I assume) for a separate penalty for using an EP after the lineup has been given to the umpire. Therefore, the only thing S1 can be is an unreported substitute. This means that B8 is no longer in the game, and the analysis then follows what WMB posted (B8 coming to bat is an illegal player, etc.)

The only thing I would add is whether the illegal players have to still be in the game when the protest is filed. S1 and B8 are not on base. Their infractions may (...may - I don't know U-trip rules) be moot at the time of the protest.

Not a shot

The ONLY possible batting out of order you have is #8 as that is the ONLY player that did not bat immediately behind the player directly before them in the batting order.

I'll stick with my original response, there are still no outs and #2 is still in box.

Irish - SUB1 is an unreported substitute. SUBSTITUTE! Under U-trip (which basically copies NFHS rules) SUB1 is legally in the game when the umpire says "play," or allows F1 to pitch.

If SUB1 is legally in the game, then #8 is out of the game, with re-entry rights.

When #8 re-enters the game, instead of going to the base and sending SUB1 back to the dugout, she instead bats for #9. That makes her an illegal sub and, when discovered, if still at bat or on base she is called out. And, even if in the dugout, she is done for the game.

And so it cascades on down. The only question in my mind is if the umpire is working this out retroactively, should he stop when #1 is the 3rd out. If so, then #2 is not an illegal sub because the offensive side is over. So #2 could re-enter for #1 and be up first the next inning.

Doesn't matter, though because the team lost 3 players and have only 7 left. Game over.

WMB

And if you read my first post you will see that I qualified my statement based on rules being comparable to ASA.

Nonetheless, IMPO, any rule which supports such a "cascading" effect that compromises the actions of others not related to the original error, is ludicrous. As previously stated, no player did anything wrong besides Sub 1 and #8.

I suspect it is more of a "We didn't think of THAT!" on the part of the rules writers / editors. True BOO infractions don't cascade because the BOO rule has a "stop damage" rule for declaring past infractions legal.

The bug-a-boo about the illegal player rule is the illegal player remains illegal past the next pitch. There is no provision allowing for an "inserted" player instead of an illegal sub. With the FLEX, and with the various EP rule sets, such an allowance would seem to be useful to stop the cascading.

Speaking NFHS now (since I don't know U-trip), I'd like to see this addressed in the illegal player rules. There was some hint that NFHS would likely interpret the cascading as unintended and not the proper ruling, but I've seen nothing official. ASA has somewhat of the same problem, but it is more limited in the situations and the total damage.

Where it is most likely to come up in the fast pitch game is confusion (by the players or even coaches) surrounding the listing of the FLEX as B10 in the lineup. If she bats, she has to be batting FOR someone, not just inserting herself into the order as B10.

I have now read several posts here in the past few months where, by the interpretations given in this board, a simple oversight by one player becomes a rolling snowball that threatens to wipeout an entire game.

I think Mike's initial interpretation is the most sane one: One BOO that wasn't caught, play on.

Which has the unfortunate problem of not being supported by the rules. There was no BOO. There was not a player who was IN the batting order who batted in the wrong slot. You cannot apply the BOO rule to an unreported substitute and illegal re-entry just because you think it is the "most sane."

I don't think we need to go outside the rules to fix this. I believe Mike has this nailed without over thinking it. Reading ASA Rule 4 section 6-C 3 and 4 we can understand the intention. 3 tells us we get and out and a disqualification prior to a pitch or play. 4 tells us that after a pitch, that the at-bat and all actions are legitimized and only the illegal substitution can be corrected. The real question falls to who did the illegal sub enter the game for? Our assumption is for B8, but the rules give us no real guidance. We use our judgment and common sense to determine which players are affected. So lets run down the scenarios.

1)Illegal sub takes a pitch and defense protests. Sub disqualified B8 assumes count. B8 makes most sense.
2)Illegal sub reaches base, defense protests prior to pitch. Sub out and disqualified, B8 re-enters or legal sub enters. Move any runners back and B9 up. Again makes the most sense that illegal sub was for B8.
3)Illegal sub reaches base and B8 takes a pitch. Defense protests. 4-6-C-4 tells us we do not have an out and all previous play stands. To me there are two possible fixes to “Who's on First”
a) Sub disqualified, B8 re-enters or legal sub to replace at base occupied and B9 assumes count. This still assumes the illegal sub was for B8. Of course the issue becomes how can B8 be on base and bat at the same time?
b) Sub disqualified B7 re-enters or legal sub to replace at base occupied and B8 continues to bat. Instead of multiple illegal subs we have illegal sub for B7 who BOO. First pitch to B8 make at bat legal and we just fix the illegal sub.

To me the offense screwed up with the illegal substitution but the defense screwed up but by letting it go to long. My reading of 4-6-C-4 is the defense has lost its opportunity to get an out and undo play and this is now just a fix it. I do not believe that ASA or NFHS wants a forfeit due to cascading illegal substitutes. But I could be wrong.

Paul

OK,simplifying the OP for discussion purposes.

S1 enters to bat unreported when B8 is due up. S1 hits the ball and reaches base.
B8 bats, hits the ball, reaches base and advances S1.
B9 bats, hits a double (this is to clear the bases of S1 and B8). S1 and B8 score.
B1 takes a pitch and the defense protests.

At the time S1 stepped into the batter's box, there is no confusion as to who she is batting for by rule (since she was unreported, we don't know who she THOUGHT she was batting for). She is batting for B8. There is no one else she could be batting for. The only legal place for B8, then, to re-enter the game is in the batter's box while S1 is still at-bat, or on base to run for S1. Anything else is illegal.

Do we agree with that so far?

Leave ASA out of the discussion. The OP was U-trip, and it has been stated that U-trip follows (by and large) NFHS rules. Since I have an NFHS rule book, but not a U-trip book, then I'll use NFHS.

I agree that NFHS (and by extension, U-trip) do not want cascading penalties, but they need to address this in the rules / interpretations. The problem is that once the illegal player completes her at bat, and then the other player's follow in order, to stop the cascade, we have to resort to some kind of made up interpretation. Not a bad solution on the field in a real game (especially if protests are not allowed), but this is a rules discussion board, not a real game.

Once we have B8 as an illegal re-entry, we then have the problem, again, of who she is re-entering for, and the cascade begins. There needs to be some kind of stop-loss rule here. Simple language about batters following in order or something would help. Or, even a "call it like we say, not like the rules say" official interpretation would work.

As I said, this is a situation that takes the unreported sub / illegal re-entry scenario beyond where the rules writers have apparently thought it though. It needs to be addressed officially.

“At the time S1 stepped into the batter's box, there is no confusion as to who she is batting for by rule (since she was unreported, we don't know who she THOUGHT she was batting for). She is batting for B8. There is no one else she could be batting for. The only legal place for B8, then, to re-enter the game is in the batter's box while S1 is still at-bat, or on base to run for S1. Anything else is illegal.”

Do we agree with that so far?

Yes and no. Sorry if I was not illustrative enough. S1 (the illegal sub) isn’t anything until the offensive manager or umpire assign her a status. Remember the offensive coach can fix this prior to the defense protesting. With the view that she is automatically in the line up in the spot you chose, that would not be possible. With your situation and the defensive coach protests, than I would agree. But I believe the ongoing situation is fluid. For instance if the offensive manager catches the mistake he could sub S1 for B7 to preserve re-entry rights for B8 and then bring the correct batter B8 to bat. With S1 on base the defensive coach could sub her for anyone not on base or at bat if caught before a protest. If S1 scores as in the OP and is in the dugout too bad.


I am not saying this should not be addressed and clearly spelled out. More information is usually helpful.

Paul

S1 is not an illegal sub. She is an unreported sub. That is what she is, by rule. Remember, we are talking NFHS here. NFHS Rule 3-3-3No, he can't. Not in NFHS. He can mitigate the penalty, but she has already entered the game and B8 has left the game. No option.See above rule cite. She IS automatically in the lineup by rule.No, he can't. Not in NFHS.No, he can't. Not in NFHS.

The bottom line is, in NFHS, once S1 steps into the batter's box, and the ball is live, she is in the game. No option. He can mitigate the penalty by announcing the sub (a team warning results), but he can't change the fact that S1 has entered the game and B8 has left the game.

The problem here is that the coach probably did not know this was an unreported sub. He thought it was the EP. Hence, he will make no effort to correct the mistake, hence the high probability of a more severe error (illegal player) and the cascade of illegal players.