Properly noting a "benched" defensive player

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by RadioBlue

JEL:
I understand your point. However, I believe the intent of the rule is for F1 and F2 to receive the benefit of the CR as listed on the starting lineup. Since my lineup could conceiveably change multiple times during the top of the 1st, under your interpretation, I could have multiple CRs due to the fact as manager I could "change" who my F1 and/or F2 is during the top of the 1st.

Looks as if this would be a good case for an editorial change to clarify the matter.

Speaking ASA

There is no change necessary. Actually, the rule is pretty clear.

The team batting in the top of the first is not going to have a defensive change. After that, what you have noted on your line-up card is relatively irrelevant as to who can or cannot enjoy the benefit of a courtesy runner.

[JEL]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Speaking ASA

There is no change necessary. Actually, the rule is pretty clear.

The team batting in the top of the first is not going to have a defensive change. After that, what you have noted on your line-up card is relatively irrelevant as to who can or cannot enjoy the benefit of a courtesy runner.

While I do agree, I still see where an addition of the phrase "starting line-up" or line-up "as submitted" or (F1 and F2) "as listed by the coach" would simplify it some (to me anyway).

[youngump]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Speaking ASA

There is no change necessary. Actually, the rule is pretty clear.

The team batting in the top of the first is not going to have a defensive change. After that, what you have noted on your line-up card is relatively irrelevant as to who can or cannot enjoy the benefit of a courtesy runner.

I think the point is what if the coach comes out and gives you a defensive change. Blue, that real slow runner who just got on, I've decided to have her catch next inning. *Turns around* Time, I've got a CR for my catcher.
Not taking the position change until it happens works great for every inning except the top of the 1st. For that we're applying common sense, but the rule could be more clear.
(Or in the incident case, at the plate meeting, I've decided to have my bench only hitter catch)
________
apartments for sale Pattaya

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by youngump

I think the point is what if the coach comes out and gives you a defensive change. Blue, that real slow runner who just got on, I've decided to have her catch next inning. *Turns around* Time, I've got a CR for my catcher.
Not taking the position change until it happens works great for every inning except the top of the 1st. For that we're applying common sense, but the rule could be more clear.
(Or in the incident case, at the plate meeting, I've decided to have my bench only hitter catch)

Boy, you talk about taking something so simple, yes, SIMPLE, and turning it into a TWP-type scenario

If you are not taking a change until it happens, then you don't take a defensive change until the team is on defense. If the team is on defense, they cannot have a runner on base! Duh!

And what the hell is a "my bench only hitter catch"?

JMHO, but anyone who cannot grasp 8.10.A & B might want to consider not working FP.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Boy, you talk about taking something so simple, yes, SIMPLE, and turning it into a TWP-type scenario

If you are not taking a change until it happens, then you don't take a defensive change until the team is on defense. If the team is on defense, they cannot have a runner on base! Duh!

And what the hell is a "my bench only hitter catch"?

JMHO, but anyone who cannot grasp 8.10.A & B might want to consider not working FP.

Easy, there, Mike. I understand the rule; and I agree it's simple. That just doesn't mean it's written unambiguously. The OP had the DP starting out playing defense. By rule, that's not allowed. The DP has to start in the DP slot. The first time the visitors take the field the DP can be inserted to start playing catcher if they'd like.
That's not a substitution but I'd still write it on my lineup card to know who gets the CR. If they told me during the plate conference then I'd probably write it down then, while I had it out (or they might have done it for me). It now says on my lineup card that the DP is catching. (And there's not a rule in the book that governs how defensive position changes happen.) Now the ambiguity is that they didn't mean who was listed at the position by me as a factor in keeping straight what was happening, they meant the one listed in the starting lineup. The rules certainly provide plenty of cover for getting the ruling right.

But they would be more clear and allow less room for error if they simply said starting lineup. It would be a simple change to make the rule even simpler.
________
BeautyGirL

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by youngump

Easy, there, Mike. I understand the rule; and I agree it's simple. That just doesn't mean it's written unambiguously. The OP had the DP starting out playing defense. By rule, that's not allowed.

By rule, of course, it is allowed. The DP can play defense at any time.

The DP has to start in the DP slot. The first time the visitors take the field the DP can be inserted to start playing catcher if they'd like.

And would have to be listed as the catcher on the line-up card to engage the CR rule.

That's not a substitution but I'd still write it on my lineup card to know who gets the CR.

Unless it is for the FLEX, then it is treated in the same manner as a substitution.

If they told me during the plate conference then I'd probably write it down then, while I had it out (or they might have done it for me). It now says on my lineup card that the DP is catching. (And there's not a rule in the book that governs how defensive position changes happen.)

Guess what? There isn't any for the offensive changes, either. Just bodies, in and out of the game. Obviously, a substitution usually involves a change on offense, but it isn't always a given in FP.

Now the ambiguity is that they didn't mean who was listed at the position by me as a factor in keeping straight what was happening, they meant the one listed in the starting lineup. The rules certainly provide plenty of cover for getting the ruling right.

But they would be more clear and allow less room for error if they simply said starting lineup. It would be a simple change to make the rule even simpler.

The ONLY reason teams put the FLEX in the starting line-up and make the change at the plate meeting is because the rules require you to start with the FLEX for it to be available.

And the management of it is really simple. The line-up card you have at the start of the game (which is the first pitch) is the official line-up.

This is a petty issue that no more needs addressing than the width of the foul line.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

...This is a petty issue that no more needs addressing than the width of the foul line.

Which reminds me, if the field is lined with a really, really skinny foul line, and the batted ball stops just outside the line about half way between home and 3B, and you can sight down from the edge of home plate to the outside edge of 3B and can easily judge the ball to be inside the edges of the bases... is this a fair ball?

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by youngump

I understand the rule; and I agree it's simple. That just doesn't mean it's written unambiguously. The OP had the DP starting out playing defense. By rule, that's not allowed.

Which rule set?? Please cite.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

Which rule set?? Please cite.

I guess I'll have to look it up. Unless Steve has it handy since he's the first one on the thread who made the claim.
My intuitive understanding of the definitions has the DP only hitting when submitted on the line up and then everything else being a switch. If the rules don't back that up, then I agree the point is moot.
________
Wellbutrin Settlement

[AtlUmpSteve]

Follow everything Mike said above; 4.3-E makes clear the DP can play ANY defensive position. Substitution rules allow them to announce that the DP will catch at the plate meeting, as soon as the PU accepts the lineup as official. That makes that person the catcher now listed on the lineup in the top of the first inning, in addition to being the DP (a move allowed by the definition of DP, because 1) that play was initially listed in the lineup as the DP, and 2) that position in the batting order is now "twinned" with the FLEX for the purpose of all DP/FLEX movements).

Once reported as a defensive change prior to the start of the first inning, that person is now the player "listed on the lineup as the" catcher (ASA 8.1-B). It meets every requirement of the written rule, and is not specifically excluded by any other rule, rule supplement, or interpretation by the NUS. Therefore, it is legal, and must be permitted.

Is it a loophole? Possibly; but we aren't permitted to interpret that this isn't legal, either. Only the NUS can do that; and to my knowledge, has not. Since it isn't completely new, perhaps you should consider that the NUS considers it legal, too?