CR reported but not in game
 

Had a game yesterday and this happened. I was BU. Coach reported to PU and he announced that CR would come in and run for pitcher. After an out was recorded, the OC discovered that the CR had not taken the pitchers position on first base. Isn't the PU lineup the official line-up? It showed the CR should be on first but wasn't. I was thinking that since CR was the one that should be there and pitcher couldn't replace CR on base, this should maybe be treated as an illegal substitution even though an illegal substitution hadn't taken place. If this was an illegal substitution, the offended team could notify the PU or an umpire without the offended team notifying him could rule on it. What do you think? Dave

use rule 10
rule 10 to go with illegal player and add an d to rule 4 6 F 3

Sorry I forgot to say NFHS rules.

If the offended team did not protest it.........

In NFHS, this sit would fall under the illegal sub rules "as in 3-4" (73, 2009).

Per rule 3-4, it does not matter who discovers it, including Mr. Umpire, and the penalty is restriction and and out.

If in fact it is a rule violation, it would be an illegal substitution and wouldn't need to be protested by the offending team. In my head I am thinking that's what it is but it kind of seems goofy. Dave

Restriction of whom?

Not to hijack the thread which deals with the correct ruling under NFHS; would like to ask about the correct ruling under ASA.

Under ASA 8-10..am I correct here in applying the EFFECT for a violation of 8.10.G; when it's brought to my attention by the DC/offended team?

Is the player who gets disqualified under 8.10.G (if that is the correct rule application) the CR who did not go out and take her proper place on base, OR is it the the runner she was suppose be a CR for?

Also am I correct on the following:

1) No penalty applied if brought to my attention by the OC?

2)Does the completion of the time at bat have any bearing on the ruling?

Set me straight on anything I missing or screwing up here under ASA.
Thnx

The exact opposite of this OP is discuss in the NFHS Case Book. A CR takes the place of the pitcher without it being reported. Unreported sub team warning.

I have a bigger problem that the PU (and less-you) allowed this to happen. Preventative umpiring can stop so many things from happening.

PU: Coach where's that CR you reported.

OR

BU: Time. Hey partner didn't OC just report a CR? PU: Yes. BU: She didn't take the base. PU: Coach where's that CR you reported.

i think i will go with the pitcher.

While she and the cr never completed, in the physical sense, any part of the language of the rule being replaced or entering, the pitcher is out there and she is not suppose to be there. What are you going to do? Go to rule 10?

But if we interpret replaced or entered as being accomplished by the mere informing of the ump and announcement of the sub and then when we see that somebody else is there who is not suppose to be there, we have a violation. NFHS deems this occurance an illegal substitution. In our case, the pitcher is illegal and has to go. If no other pitcher, then kill your partner for his or her boneheaded mistake.


i think we will have a new rule for the rule books. seems like a no brainer. has to be added as language does not really cover this sit adequately. of course, they will say do not let it happen but we already knew that.

When a substitute is reported, s/he is officially in the game once the PU accepts the change. That means the legal player on base is the CR. In ASA, there is an EFFECT that failing to report as a CR results in disqualification of the CR; but no such note in NFHS.

Since the legal person on base is the CR, and the pitcher may not reenter to run (unless CR is required as the only available substitute for an injury or disqualification, or the CR herself is injured or disqualified), I would submit that the illegal substitute is the pitcher.

As others have stated, preventative officiating (and working together as a team) should keep this from happening. I could only excuse this if there was also a conference during this stoppage, and when the multiple players broke from the huddle, THEN it wasn't noticed that the CR didn't enter. (Another good argument for the NCAA disallowing the gratuitous huddles as freebie conferences without a charged conference.)

I will take some of the blame for this one. I was working with a new partner which still doesn't excuse me. I guess I got lazy and didn't pay attention to what had transpired. Not trying to get off the hook, but I have never had this happen before and just assumed the CR coming in would happen. I know as a PU, I always make sure what has been reported to me, happens. This will keep me on my toes for next time. BTW, has this ever happened to any of you, but you stopped it before it did? Dave

Well, I agree, but don't. Don't know the situation. Could have very well had other things going on besides babysitting the coach's team. Yes, it would be preferable if you actually saw the entry of the player. However, as a PU, your attention could be pulled in another direction.

When a coach comes to umpire with changes, it isn't a "responsibility" of the umpire to stand there and double-check everyone's number who is walking on and off the field. Being alert and observent is good, but I'm not going to gig an umpire for a team's faus pax unless it was so obvious it could not have been missed.

I am going to go out on a limb further. If the umpires should never had let this happen, which some are stating, than why even have a section in the rule books, talking about illegal substitutions and the penalties? If we always use preventative umpiring and never let these types of things happen, there should never be a ruling on illegal substitutions. Sometimes on this board it surfaces on what can be construed as umpires coaching the players instead of just umpiring. Some preventative umpiring is OK, but I don't believe we are there to babysit the teams and tell them what they can and cannot do. Dave

Now I remember a play from my last nationals. I was the BU. Pitcher gets a hit and the coach enters a courtesy runner. My partner, the PU, notes it and the cr enters. After a pitch, DC comes out and protests an illegal player. He says the runner they put in as a courtesy runner was a player already in the game. PU comes to me and tells me what has happened. They have no legal sub so we have an out and a disqualification. Why the PU let it happen, I does [sic] not know.

Yet the NCAA philosophy on this, as stated in manual is: "Do not allow accept or allow changes you know are illegal."
They go onto say, "If a coach requests a change that you know is not legal, do not allow it to happen. If, after being told he cannot make a certain change, the coach asks what he can do, tell him-if you understand what he is trying to accomplish."

So here at the one of the higher levels, we are being directed to do just that...babysit the teams in regard to lineup management.

Doesn't make any difference to me, it's their (NCAA) rule set so I do what they tell me they want me to do. I'm always somewhat unsure has to how far I should take this philosophy (if at all) when I'm working under ASA rules.

Where is the proper spot to draw the line between preventive umpiring and "coaching/babysitting" coaches regarding lineup changes working ASA or for that matter NFHS, or any other rule sets many of us work?

Personally, I have always used that philosophy, in every level; that it is always our responsibility to refuse to accept an illegal substutution when it is initially presented. That isn't coaching or babysitting; it is preventative officiating, and a reasonable expectation of any coach that you wouldn't accept any obvious rules violation.

But, that's just my opinion. And I do see the possibility that the PU was involved with something that took his attention; as I pointed out, a huddle of players could excuse that.

But (and I don't really know exactly how this happened), I am picturing an OC coming out and saying "Time! Blue, I have a courtesy runner, number 12 for my pitcher"; and the PU looking at his lineup, seeing it is legitimate, recording that, announcing it to the scorekeeper and the other team. And no one notices that number 12 doesn't exchange positions with the pitcher?? If that is the case, it just shouldn't happen.

Am I checking the numbers on the jerseys as they pass?? Hell no. But I am making sure they pass in that situation.

At the 18A USA National UIC Jim Craig said, "At any level, any tournament, any game we use preventative umpiring. There is no line to draw".

No, that is not the same thing as this thread supposes.

Yes, you don't allow a change that was not legal, but as concerned in a thread or two ago, this thread has just taken a left turn to a completely different scenario.

If your answer to everything is "preventive umpiring" then I expect each umpire to take one change at a time, observe that change physically occur including watching the replaced player enter the dugout and then turn to the coach and ask if there is anything else you can do for him/her.

Absurd? Absolutely, just as it is to dress down an umpire because a coach offered an umpire a valid and legal change and his player failed to execute it.

Mike, if that is how you read my earliest response, then either I wasn't clear, or you misunderstood. Not a dressing down in my mind, but a statement that it really shouldn't happen unders normal circumstances.

Shipwreck Dave, if you took me that way, too, as dressing you down, then I apologize; not my intention.

Wasn't referring to you, Steve.

Was this screwed up? Yes, but **** happens and we can discuss, but I'm not pointing at the umpire for not catching something that is standard and valid change.

And no intent at all here to dress down Shipwreck either.
I could easily see the same thing happening in one of my games, as such I learned something from reading his OP, and had my own thoughts on proper preventative umpiring solidified.