batting out of order...or ....
 

ASA rules, though I don't think it matters.

Here's the sit - I am going to refer to the batters by name here as who they are in the lineup card - forgive me if this is different than what is the accepted way, but I don't know how else to describe it and the lineup will matter. I'm sure someone will fix my error anyway.



Lead off batter, B9, grounds out. (1 out)

Second batter in the inning, B1, walks.

Third batter, B2, fouls out to F3, (2 out) and F3 carries the ball to dead ball territory. PU signals and says out and dead ball, PU and BU say "dead ball, that's a catch and carry" and award runner second. (yes she does tag up properly after the award).

Next batter in the inning SHOULD BE B3. However, for some reason, B2 stays at the plate. (She states that she didn't know she was out). She hits the next pitch to first for the ground out. (3 outs)

Now the DC argues that the batter batted out of order. The OC didn't know that she was the same batter and got up again.

We go to the next inning and now want to put the correct batter up to the plate.

Who is that?



This was the way I had to end my season today. (I was BU). I'll tell you that my partner and I didn't agree on the correct ruling and that one of the coaches threatened a protest if we ruled the incorrect batter to the plate.

We finally came up with our ruling (B4 is now up) but I'd like to know if we were right. (No protest was filed).

Assuming defensive coach makes his appeal in time (before infielders cross foul lines, perhaps?) then B4 leads off next inning.

My partner argued that because B2 batted and got out, that B3 would be up. I said that B2 batted for B3 by batting again and now we go to B4, the next correct batter in the lineup.

I agree with your assessment. B3 would be declared out, and B4 is the next batter.

Though the PU sure screwed the pooch by not noticing B2 batting after being declared out.

To clear up some .. here's how it was discovered.

There were a few lengthy delays throughout this inning. Switching the ball because it was wet after the lead off ground out.....two defensive conferences. After the catch and carry, I must not have advanced the number of outs on my indicator to 2. And neither did my partner, because once I arrived in the C position, he flashed 1 out to me. The DC knew there were 3 outs after B2 grounded out. But after the ground out for the 3rd out, it was the OC who thought he was jipped. He argued that there were only two outs and he didn't know that the foul out was an out. (I don't know how). NO ONE noticed that the B2 got up again. OC says she only grounded out, to which DC said yes and she also fouled out. She batted twice. My partner said, "yes she batted twice and we now have 4 outs." (DOH!). DC says she shouldn't have batted, and it should have been B3. OC is MAD that PU wasn't paying attention and let her bat again. PU says, I didn't realize it until she was running to first on the groundout.

We think that's the end of that, but I realize that when they bat again, we will have the same issue because who will lead off????

Now the next time they come up my partner tells him that his number 3 batter is up, because the number 2 batter made last out. DC comes out and says it should be B4 up. PU calls me in and then goes to get rule book. I ask to see scorebooks. I wait for partner and hear him out as he tries to say that we have to put B3 up because B2 made last out. I say no, as B2 batted and fouled out and then B2 batted (for B3) and grounded out.

The DC said that if B3 batted, he would protest the game. I was pretty sure that the correct batter was to be B4. In this third out situation, was I wrong? The BOO was brought up, but it was also stated that it didn't matter as there were already three outs.

In a batting out of order situation, it is not the wrong batter that is called out, it is the batter who should have batted who is out. In your situation, B3 should have been the batter, but B2 batted in her place. B3 is out on the appeal, B4 is your lead off batter the next inning.

What he said.

After a succsessful bating out of order appeal, the next correct batter is the one whose name immediately follows the batter who was called out for failing to bat.

In your scenario...

- B3 (who should have been the proper batter) is called for failing to bat.

- B4 is the next proper batter.

"OC is MAD that PU wasn't paying attention and let her bat again."

OC was asleep at the wheel and wants to blame it on the umpires.

I know that when BOO occurs, the next correct batter is the one whose name immediately follows the batter who was called out for failing to bat. My question is, that in my scenario, no one was called out for failing to bat. We had 3 outs in the inning - then the DC said there was BOO.

So, in this case, when you already have 3 outs, and BOO is discovered, the next inning we put up the batter who's turn it should be had there NOT been BOO? Even though we didn't get an out for BOO?

B4 bats...correct?

Sorry if I'm making this confusing, I just want to make sure I understand this specific situation.

My partner's argument was that once B2 took a pitch on her incorrect at bat, she became the correct batter and it's too late to do anything about it and that the lineup "resets" from that point on. I maintained that no matter how many outs there were, the next batter that should come up at this point is B4, because B3 failed to bat.

If you were to notice the improper batter is at the plate, what would you do?

Nothing.... BOO is an appeal that must be brought to the umpires attention by the coach.

Without having read the entire clarification, I would've just stated, "batter, you were out." The next batter would've stepped up to the plate.

It happens a lot with kids and rec SP.

NFHS ( I don't do ASA)

This is a BOO appeal. If made properly (before the next pitch, legal or illegal or before the infielders have left the field) and if the wrong player batted you uphold the appeal.

Sounds like in your situation the defense appealed at the right time, this nullifies the improper batters turn at bat and the player who did not bat is out, so B4 would be the correct batter to start the next inning.

If a pitch had been thrown to another batter (or if the infielders had left the field) after B2's improper turn at bat was completed then B2's turn at bat would become legal and B3 would be the proper batter to bat next. This may be where your partner is confused. It is a pitch to the batter following improper batter (or the infielders leaving the field) that legitimizes the improper batters turn at bat, not a pitch to the improper batter.

If the appela was made properly it sounds like you had BOO and B4 is the correct batter.

I think B$ is professional baseball terminology. :D

Everyone is forgetting a very important detail. The groundout by the improper batter was the third out of the inning. In ASA, thou shalt not call a fourth out unless it is an appeal on a runner who has scored. Unlike NCAA, there is no stipulation for allowing an appeal on BOO as a fourth out. Without being able to appeal, B2's second at-bat must stand, and B3 will lead off next inning.

This is a major loophole in the ASA rules, and I have brought it to the attention of numerous "higher-ups," with no clear answer.

Situation #2: 2 outs, B6 is due up to bat. Instead, B9 comes to bat and grounds out. 3 outs. Without being able to appeal, B9's at-bat is legal. B1 leads off next inning. You have just effectively skipped the bottom of the order.

Wait - that makes no sense! If that were the case, then a coach can send his number 2 batter up to bat any time there are two outs and have her hit a pitch while she was standing on home plate for the third out JUST so he can send his number 3 batter up to the plate in the next inning - presuming they don't get caught of course.

Exactly. But, try to find support in the rules for calling that 4th out on a BOO. It just isn't there, beyond applying the "God" rule (10-1) at your personal discretion. It appears this is the only time where it would be advantageous for the defensive coach to call attention to the BOO during the at bat.

NCAA has this covered:

So...you're saying I was incorrect with having batter number 4 come up?

Due to this technicality, yes. If there had been less than 2 outs, then your ruling would have been correct. (And, as you can see, most on this board, without realizing this technicality, would have ruled the same.) I would welcome discussion otherwise from others on the board.

It comes down to two things:
1) Honor the appeal. B3 is out for failing to bat. B4 due up next inning. But, IMO, this is not supported by rule as this would be the 4th out.
2) Do not honor the appeal, due to (1). B2's at bat is legal, and B3 is due up.

Do you honor the appeal?

You mean rule 10-3-C. 10-1 talks about the power and duties of the umpire.


I was not looking to call, not did we call a fourth out on the play. The batter who hit twice, B2 in the lineup, grounded out for out 3. The coach then told the plate umpire that she batted again and that the offense batted out of order. The coach asks for his appeal - he even had his catcher say it to the PU. The appeal was proper and legal. Since we had a 3rd out, we will not get an additional out, but we do have to make sure that the correct batter comes up in the next half inning. I believe that correct batter is B4.

No, I meant what I said. 10-3-C talks about an umpire who reverses a call and puts a team in jeopardy. 10-1 mentions "They have the power to order a player, coach, captain or manager to carry out or to omit any act which, in their judgment is necessary to give force and effect to one or all of these rules..."

So you are saying you can appeal BOO and not call an out? That's not possible. You either appeal for the out or you don't. You can't pick which half of the "EFFECT" you want, IMO.

The defensive team forfeits its right to appeal BOO when a legal or illegal pitch has been made to the following batter (this did not happen due to the third out of the inning) or when the pitcher and all infielders have clearly vacated their normal fielding positions and have left fair territory on their way to the dugout or bench. (No, this did not happen either).

So the defense has the right to appeal BOO in this situation in the OP.

Next issue...

If the error is discovered AFTER the incorrect batter has completed a turn at bat (check) and before a legal or illegal pitch has been made to the following batter (can't happen in my case) or before the pitcher and all infielders have clearly vacated their normal fielding positions and have left fair territory on their way to the dugout or bench area (THIS DID HAPPEN),

EFFECT(S)
a. The player who should have batted (B3 in my OP) is OUT. (But we already have 3 outs so now what?)

b. Any advance or score made by the improper batter shall be nullified (ground out...no advance, no anything, it was the third out so no problems there) Any out that is made prior to discovering this infraction remains an OUT. (so her ground out remains out NUMBER 3. Check.)

c. The next batter is the player whose name follows that of the player who was called out for failing to bat. (Player failing to bat was B3, so isn't that B4?)

d. If the batter declared out under these circumstances is the third out, the correct batter in the next inning shall be the batter who would have come to bat had the player been put out under ordinary play. (what? We already had 3 outs, so she was not declared the third out under these circumstances.)

I am NOT choosing which half of the effect I want. I was following the rule to the letter. I still don't see where B3 comes to bat.

I do see your argument, but I guess my real question here is....does it change the way the rule is interpreted when you have three outs? I think we all agree that if there was only one out and the improper batter grounded out for out number 2 and then the defense properly appealed BOO, we would declare B3 out, and it would be the third out and B4 would bat. Also, if there were no outs and the same thing happened, we would call B3 out for BOO, keep the out for the ground out of B2, and have B4 come up to bat. So why would this be different since it was the third out?

My opinion; not an official ASA ruling or case play, as I don't have that authority. But, I do have some insight from the ASA Rules Committee (former member).

In the case you are discussing, IF a proper appeal was made for BOO, I WOULD honor it. Not a fourth out appeal; a BOO appeal FIRST rules the correct batter out, THEN tells you to keep OTHER outs made on that play. In my mind, that means the BOO isn't the a fourth out appeal; it supercedes and becomes the third out, and whatever happened on the play becomes fourth (and even fifth) outs.

Admitting I drank two 32 oz margaritas (and a beer before, and a beer after) before coming home, doesn't this fix all the issues named above??

NOTE: Hey, it was a long day. 90 degrees plus, high humidity, I called 18 Gold at 9, 11, off at 1, 3, 5, and 7. Five games in 6 slots; I needed the salt (on the rim), the liquid, and yes, the tequila.

Back tomorrow at 9, 11, 1, and 5. And don't blame the assignor; it's me, and it's necessary.

I agree, if we were going to honor the appeal, this condition is met. However, you still have not demonstrated how we can honor the appeal at all, as the only way to get a fourth out is on a runner who has scored.

"Now what" is that, IMO, you can't honor the appeal, because you can't have a 4th out.

New emphasis mine.
B3 comes to bat because we haven't honored the appeal and B2's at bat (the second one) is legal.

I agree, in these situations, the appeal would be honored. The difference is, the rulebook gives a specific way to obtain a 4th out, and this isn't it.

First, the book does not allow for a 5th out. Reference? The NCAA book mentions it, but ASA does not.

You have correctly identified the issue. Which out is called "first"? If the proper batter is called out "first," we have no issue. Honor the appeal. However, since the rule says "all outs made stand," it leads me to believe that they have already been recorded, and occur "first."

If we can agree that since a. comes before b., then the proper batter is called out "first," then that's what I will call from this point forward and be able to sleep at night. :D

Nice work....
And the result is logical (to what most of us think).

I'll drink to that....

Stay hydrated! :cool:

What would do that, the tequila or the worm?

This is incorrect... and perhaps the fact that this is incorrect is why you are not getting any response from your higher ups. Your assertion is simply wrong. The appeal for BOO is certainly allowed. It's not a 4th out appeal. The BOO is the 3rd out.

Consider a more complex situation. Bases loaded, 2 outs, wrong batter hits a triple and is thrown out at home. Are you going to disallow a BOO appeal here, allowing 3 runs to score simply because the BR was put out? Of course not. The batter that should have batted is out (that's 3). Runners put back on their bases, and any runners put out on the play called out (THAT is now the 4th out.)

No major loophole at all. This is a major topic that I teach to new umpires... especially the fact that you have to get the order of the penalty correct.

In ASA you need to read the rule literally and linerally. 8.2.D.2 EFFECT a) "The player who should have batted is out." That's the first thing. THAT player is the 3rd out. THEN you move on to the rest of the penalty - b) Nullify play, all outs stand. (the phantom 4th out that doesn't count is on the BR). Don't be tricked into thinking "all outs stand" happens before "play is nullified" or before "the player who should have batted is out." You gotta keep it linear in this rule penalty.

In your Sit #2, the 3rd out is the player who should have batted, or B6. Then B7 comes to bat next inning.

Here we go with the common sense again.....good job, gentlemen!

There's an echo in here... :)

+1

Sounds good to me. Like I said, if you guys could come up with a good reason to honor the appeal, I could sleep at night. I just wish the wording were more clear. "All outs stand" to me sounds like they have already happened, even if you read the EFFECT literally and linearly. Can anyone find a casebook play or rule clarification that would support that the BOO out is applied first? I am well aware that it would solve all of the problems and potential situations, I'm just saying there's not much supporting evidence.

I'm not sure you really need a case-play here. We have a specific rule that tells us when the defense loses it's right to appeal. Having the 3rd out made during a play is not mentioned. I admit to a minor amount of ambiguity here - but when something can be read 2 ways, and 1 way is consistent with the other rules and the other is not --- go with the one that's consistent with the other rules.

Thanks everyone...sigh of relief that my call was accurate after all. Great discussion and contribution by everyone in the thread. It's this discussion and thought that makes me better as an umpire.

Bah. I never pay attention to Steve, anyway...


;)

The BOO out is applied first because it occurred first. The incorrect batter can not hit the ball w/o coming to bat incorrectly. As said, linearly (good word).

Normally I would agree but given a few of the specifics of the situation.

#1 "ruled it a catch and carry" I understand what this means but if it wasn't clearly indicated I could see some confusion. Base runner advancement could have been for an illegal pitch as opposed to taking the ball into DBT.

#2 "even though it was the second out, both of us indicated 1 out to the field" This adds to the confusion from #1 and I think lets the OC off the hook somewhat because if the batter had been ruled out on the previous play then it should have been two outs and it's reasonable that the OC thought that meant the ball was caught in DBT not caught in foul and carried to DBT.

#3 Plate umpire didn't remark on same batter still being up, Again this mitigates the OC's responsibility. PU wouldn't let batter continue after ball four or strike three, so why would she still be there if her at bat was complete.

Snocatzdad, here's a different perspective.

As the plate umpire, I don't pay any attention at all to the batting order as players come up to bat. I only pay attention when the coach is making substitutions or when the opposing coach is appealing a BOO.

Given the situation in the OP, IF I noticed the same batter had remained in the batter's box, I may have asked her if she knew she was out on the last play, but, again, it is the OC's responsibility to ensure the correct batter is up to bat, not mine. Recall, I was down the line watching the catch with my back to home plate. Unless I actually recognize the player, I may not notice whether the batter is the same player as before or a different player.

Umpires sometimes lose track of the number of outs; it is rare for BOTH partners to lose track at the same time, but it could happen. What the umpires signal to each other regarding the number of outs does not change the actual number of outs.

Perhaps the OC was as confused as to what happened on the previous play as his batter apparently was; if so, he should have asked for clarification. Or, perhaps he knew there were 2 outs, but when he saw the umpires signal 1 out decided not to say anything.

Regardless, even though the umpire crew may have contributed to some confusion by signaling 1 out, they are not required to explain terminology when making a correct call (i.e. "catch and carry") on the chance that one coach or the other may not understand it, and the plate umpire is not responsible for monitoring the batting order. The OP's situation and a routine strike out or base on balls are different; in a routine strike out or BOB, the PU is right there watching the batter. In the OP, he wasn't.