need help and rule reference ASA

[shipwreck]

Ok, here goes. Team A starts with 9 players and 1 sub. In the second inning batter #7 bats and safely makes it to first. Sub then bats without reporting and is safe at first, advancing runner to second. Batter #8 then bats and safely makes it to first and advances 2 base runners to second and third. Batter #9 comes up to bat and has a 1-1 count when defense realizes something is wrong and brings it up to the PU. The 2 umpires working the game didn't know how to rule so they called over the UIC. He called me today and asked what I would have done. I told him what I would have done but I may have been wrong. Please help sort this out and please give me a rule reference. They were using ASA ruleset. Is it batting out of order, unreported sub or illegal player? As a side note that doesn't affect the ruling, the sub was listed on the line underneath the #7 batter. She must have thought she was to come in after #7 batter got on base. The PU didn't catch it at the pregame meeting which may have helped.
Dave

[umpirebob71]

Rule 7 Section 2

Since the defense didn't notice anything untill several batters later, you have nothing.

[pollywolly60]

Here's the way I would have ruled: Illegal player on first base, that player is disqualified and can be replaced with a legal substitute (if available).

Here's why:
When the substitute batted after #7 batter, they automatically became an unannounced substitute for the #8 batter, whether intentional or not. So this took the #8 batter out of the game. Now when #8 batter bats next, they have illegally been substituted for the #9 batter, which makes them an illegal player. (ASA 2010, page 54, rule 4, 6, F, 4.b)

Since it looks like there are no other subs available, and batter #9 is still at bat with a 1-1 count, I'm thinking we could put #9 on first base (re-entry after illegal substitution), and put #1 batter in the box with the 1-1 count.

Any takers on this ruling?

[FullCount]

Originally Posted by shipwreck

........ As a side note that doesn't affect the ruling, the sub was listed on the line underneath the #7 batter. She must have thought she was to come in after #7 batter got on base. The PU didn't catch it at the pregame meeting which may have helped.
Dave

I'm having a hard time imagining this. How was the lineup card arranged such that the sub was listed under the #7 batter? From the cards I'm familiar with I would have thought she was the #8 batter instead of the sub. Or, if she was listed as a sub I would have questioned why she appeared to be listed in the middle of the batting order. Either way I would have made sure it was clear before concluding the plate conference. But this must be different than it seems and I just don't understand.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by FullCount

I'm having a hard time imagining this. How was the lineup card arranged such that the sub was listed under the #7 batter? From the cards I'm familiar with I would have thought she was the #8 batter instead of the sub. Or, if she was listed as a sub I would have questioned why she appeared to be listed in the middle of the batting order. Either way I would have made sure it was clear before concluding the plate conference. But this must be different than it seems and I just don't understand.

???????

[FullCount]

Like I said, I must be missing the obvious. Let me ask another way- where was the #8 and #9 batters listed? I would have thought they would have been under #7.

[shipwreck]

Around here, some of our lineup cards have an open line beneath where the starter is listed. That is where the sub was listed. As was stated in my OP, the PU should have caught this but didn't. Dave

[CelticNHBlue]

The fact that the 'substitute' (so declared and confirmed before the game) was listed below batter #7 is irrelevant to the discussion.

At the particular point in time when the defense makes the umpire aware of the situation, we have no opportunity for BOO because a pitch has been thrown to a batter (#9) who properly followed the previous batter (#8) on the line-up card.

We have had a substitute enter into the game, but we do not know for whom. My first question to the offensive coach is going to be, for whom is the substitue playing. They may want to say for no one, but that is not an option, they are in the game we can prove they are in the game as they are standing on second base. There are three results depending on whom the coach declares has been substituted:

1 - If they choose a player currently on a base (batter # 7 at third or batter #8 at first) I have an illegal player in the game (since the player and their substitute can not legally be in the game at the same time). I will be calling the starting player out and removing them from a base.

2 - If they choose batter #9 (currently at bat) I am removing this batter and replacing them with the proper batter (#1) who would follow the substitute, but the substitue is on 2nd base (having batted out of order) therefor we must skip their turn at bat and get the next batter in the line up.

3 - If they choose any other batter in the line-up, nothing changes and we resume playing.

In each case, the substitute is now reported and officially in the game.

Consequently, I ask what if this was not caught in this fashion, but instead batter #8 hit a home run so there is no one on base. When the 9th batter has had a pitch thrown to them, how do you know it was the substitute that batted improperly and not another legal offensive player just batting out of order?