ASA Test Question 11 (JO FP)
 

Okay, don't kill the recent FP convert here. :D

I have this one as false, because there is no stipulation that the FLEX must bat for themselves in order to get a courtesy runner. To me, this would be legal, as the pitcher (the FLEX) is now in the game on offense, and is eligible to have a courtesy runner on base. The DP has now left the game, and the offense is down to 9 players in the line-up.

Correct?

8.10.e

But the courtesy runner is going in for the pitcher (FLEX), who has now entered the game for the DP. The DP is no longer in the game, correct?

Just gave you the answer reference.

Case Play 8.10-5
 

PLAY 8.10-5
A team using a DP has the DP batting fourth and the FLEX pitching. The DP gets a hit and is on 2B. The coach asks for time, reports CR1 and sends them to 2B.
RULING: Illegal. Since the DP is not catching or pitching no courtesy runner is allowed. CR1 is disqualified and replaced by a legal substitute or the re-entry rule used. (8-10E)

Not exactly on point, but it illustrates the purpose of the Courtesy Runner. It is for the Pitcher and Catcher ONLY. The DP wasn't playing Pitcher or Catcher in this example. Only F1 and F2 can have a Courtesy Runner and then only if they bat for themselves.

Which goes to the point. The FLEX is F1. The FLEX (since it wasn't stated otherwise) was the pitcher of record at that time. The rule states that F1/F2 may have a CR at any time.

I'm not disagreeing with the ruling, but maybe the rule itself needs to be updated to accommodate this issue.

Also like to note (:rolleyes: ), the umpire should not allow the CR, therefore the CR wasn't in the game to be DQ'd. At least, not if the umpire was properly maintaining the line-up card. :D

I have to look up the wording again, but this issue was clarified the second year of the CR rule; the p/c run for must have batted themselves.
Another illegal version is to report the DP as the pitcher before s/he bats; but the rule requires the batter to be the player who last played the position defensively, plus the "top of first" rule.

However, in a tie breaker situation, if the ninth batter is the p/c; s/he is interpreted as "earning" her/his way on base; so can be replaced by a CR.

Exactly!

Here is the Rule Clarification from February 2010:

Rule 8, Section 10A – G: Courtesy Runner (Fast Pitch/Modified>
This year the ASA council voted to make the courtesy runner part of the modified game by a rule change submitted and approved. In the game of Fast Pitch a question has been asked concerning the ability to have the DP bat for the Flex, (the pitcher), get a hit and be replaced by the flex on base. The coach will then put a courtesy runner in for the flex, (the pitcher).

Play: In a J.O Fast Pitch game, the DP is batting in the fourth spot of the line-up for the FLEX (the pitcher). In the third inning, the DP bats and reaches 1B safely. The coach asks for time to replace the DP with the FLEX (the pitcher). The FLEX advances to 2B on a hit from the next batter. The coach again asks for time and now wants to use a Courtesy Runner for the FLEX (the pitcher). Is this legal?

Ruling: ASA does not permit a team to circumvent the Courtesy Runner rule by putting the pitcher back in the game after the DP bats for the pitcher or catcher. A Courtesy Runner is permitted in J.O. play for the pitcher and catcher only. The Courtesy Runner rule is intended for the pitcher and/or catcher who bats and is running the bases. Rule 8, Section 10B states no Courtesy Runner is allowed when a substitute enters the game to bat for the pitcher or catcher and then that pitcher or catcher re-entering the game on the bases. Rule 8, Section 10E states that no Courtesy Runner is allowed for the DP if the DP is batting for the pitcher or catcher. (Rule 8, Section 10B & E)

Could someone please inform me of WHERE in the 2012 ASA Rule Book it states the pitcher or catcher must bat and reach base legally (or earn their way on base) in order to be eligible for a courtesy runner?
NFHS rule book does indeed have this statement listed under 8-9-2

It doesn't, but may if a proposed rule change is accepted. I suggest you check with your UIC.

An approved ruling on a case play from the National Director of Umpires is THE ruling. Even if we disagree, or cannot find it to our satisfaction.

The citations listed above stand for ASA rules. If in casebook, or posted on the ASA website, it is the ruling.

And that's where my confusion lay. I had a feeling that doing so would circumvent the rule regarding the DP not being allowed a CR, but since it wasn't explicitly stated that the FLEX running for the DP could not be allowed a CR, I had no choice but to allow it.

I think we may need a rule change to further clarify it.

You did have a choice. Deny the request. Let them protest. Let your UIC deny the protest. That's why we have a protest procedure.

If it is written in the case play book, it's an official interpretation. ASA doesn't include the case play book because they would rather sell it separately and make even more money rather than print it within the book or at least supply it when umpires pay a ridiculous $15 + per rule book.

The case play does not support the ruling, either. For that matter, the rule book specifically allows for the CR to be used for the FLEX in the given instant. Only the rule clarification supports the test response and I don't have a problem with the ruling, but if given the opportunity, the rules should support the desired effect.

This is why there is a proposed rule change in the works.