Unrep Sub: Say Something or Stay Mum?

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by rwest

That's not what I am talking about. You can not return to a base left too soon under certain circumstances. This by rule is illegal.

For example.

R1 on 1B leaves with the pitch. Fly ball to center filed caught for an out. Prior to reaching 2nd R1 stops, turns around and is on her way back to 1B when the throw goes over the 1B fence. The umpire waits to give the runner time to complete her base running responsibilities. R1 does not continue to first but instead turns and heads for 2nd. The umpire calls dead ball and awards her two bases. She touches 2nd and proceeds to 3rd, when the 3rd base coach says go back and touch 2nd and then 1B before coming back to 3rd. By rule once you have reached one base beyond the base left too soon and the ball has become dead, it is illegal by rule to return to the base left too soon. Are you as an umpire going to physically prevent this from happening even though by rule it is illegal? No different in my mind than preventing a coach from making an illegal substitution. We prevent them all or none and just rule on them when required to by rule.

No, it is not illegal. It merely does not count as a retouch for purposes of appeal. It is legal for a runner to reverse directions (travesty exception aside... which I have never, ever, seen, BTW). She can go back and retouch during the dead ball and return to 3rd. It is not illegal for her to do so, and if the defense does not know the rule, they may assume she has now retouched. She hasn't, and is still in jeopardy of being out on appeal.

It is not the same thing as making an illegal sub, IMO.

I do understand your position on handling the illegal sub, however. I'm not sure about the subtle/coy comments to the coach (e.g. "are you sure you want to do that, coach") as opposed to the direct comment, "you can't do that, coach".

Since I don't call college, what does the Narcissistic Coaches Admiration Association (NCAA ) say to do?

[rwest]

Originally Posted by Dakota

No, it is not illegal. It merely does not count as a retouch for purposes of appeal. It is legal for a runner to reverse directions (travesty exception aside... which I have never, ever, seen, BTW). She can go back and retouch during the dead ball and return to 3rd. It is not illegal for her to do so, and if the defense does not know the rule, they may assume she has now retouched. She hasn't, and is still in jeopardy of being out on appeal.

Actually the rule book says the exact opposite. It says "She may not return".
I interpret "May not return" as being illegal as in "May not return to touch a base missed or left too soon on a caught fly ball if....". And the reason she is in jeopardy of being called out is because it was, wait for it....., an illegal retouch. One not allowed by rule. One that is illegal.

Originally Posted by Dakota

Since I don't call college, what does the Narcissistic Coaches Admiration Association (NCAA ) say to do?

I like the new meaning of the Acronym!

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by rwest

Actually the rule book says the exact opposite. It says "She may not return".
I interpret "May not return" as being illegal as in "May not return to touch a base missed or left too soon on a caught fly ball if....". And the reason she is in jeopardy of being called out is because it was, wait for it....., an illegal retouch. One not allowed by rule. One that is illegal.

Speaking ASA

To start, dead ball should be called when the ball enters DBT, not when a runner finishes running the bases.

However, the runner can touch whatever base they choose. What are you going to do, block the base path? Once the runner touches/passes an awarded base, s/he cannot return to touch a base missed or left too soon. While the rule notes this as an illegal act, you cannot rule the runner out for simply returning to touch a base when not permitted.

The defense must still make the proper appeal and, but rule, that must be for the runner leaving the base too soon or missing it.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Speaking ASA

To start, dead ball should be called when the ball enters DBT, not when a runner finishes running the bases.

However, the runner can touch whatever base they choose. What are you going to do, block the base path? Once the runner touches/passes an awarded base, s/he cannot return to touch a base missed or left too soon. While the rule notes this as an illegal act, you cannot rule the runner out for simply returning to touch a base when not permitted.

The defense must still make the proper appeal and, but rule, that must be for the runner leaving the base too soon or missing it.

Right, the award is given after allowing the runner to complete their base running responsibilities. The dead ball is immediately after the ball enters DBT.

I'm applying the same logic to an unreported sub or illegal substitution. Just because it is illegal doesn't mean we prevent it. We allow it knowing that they are violating the rule and rule accordingly when called upon to do so.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by rwest

I'm applying the same logic to an unreported sub or illegal substitution. Just because it is illegal doesn't mean we prevent it. We allow it knowing that they are violating the rule and rule accordingly when called upon to do so.

I disagree to a point. If you know a substitution is illegal, you do not take it. You do not allow something knowing they are violating a rule. What you don't do is initiate the action after the fact.

In the OP, if there was an indication from a player or coach that something was askew, I will look into it. An example is something I had a few years ago. A player came to the plate that I didn't recall seeing bat before, but that is not unusual as I don't sit there and try to memorize the batting order. As the pitcher approached the PP, the catcher stood up and hollered, "new batter".

I backed out from behind the plate and asked the batter if he just entered the game and recorded the proper substitution. The defense openly stated they were aware of a substitution and the batter had yet to put the ball into play or be retired.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I disagree to a point. If you know a substitution is illegal, you do not take it. You do not allow something knowing they are violating a rule. What you don't do is initiate the action after the fact.

In the OP, if there was an indication from a player or coach that something was askew, I will look into it. An example is something I had a few years ago. A player came to the plate that I didn't recall seeing bat before, but that is not unusual as I don't sit there and try to memorize the batting order. As the pitcher approached the PP, the catcher stood up and hollered, "new batter".

I backed out from behind the plate and asked the batter if he just entered the game and recorded the proper substitution. The defense openly stated they were aware of a substitution and the batter had yet to put the ball into play or be retired.

Why do we not prevent anything that is illegal by rule? Why not prevent, not physically but verbally (i.e. "No, number 24, you can't return to 1b"), a runner returning to a base that by rule she may not return to? Both are illegal by rule.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by rwest

Why do we not prevent anything that is illegal by rule? Why not prevent, not physically but verbally (i.e. "No, number 24, you can't return to 1b"), a runner returning to a base that by rule she may not return to? Both are illegal by rule.

Are you serious? As I tried (unsuccessfully) to say above, I see a huge difference, as in not even remotely in the same conversation, a so-called "illegal" action by a player during playing action that merely places the player in jeopardy of being put out and a violation by a coach of the substitution rules after notifying the umpire of his intended action.

What "illegal" playing action do we EVER prohibit before the fact?

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by rwest

Why do we not prevent anything that is illegal by rule? Why not prevent, not physically but verbally (i.e. "No, number 24, you can't return to 1b"), a runner returning to a base that by rule she may not return to? Both are illegal by rule.

There are varying degrees of "illegal" action that umpires deal with differently. Certain illegal acts require our immediate action, others do not. When we see a batter square around to bunt and her back foot touches home plate, we don't stop the pitcher while in motion and tell the batter to get her foot off the plate, do we? Nor do we tell the catcher who is about to scoop a loose ball with her helmet she'd better not touch it.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by rwest

And the reason she is in jeopardy of being called out is because it was, wait for it....., an illegal retouch. One not allowed by rule. One that is illegal.

This part is completely untrue. She is in jeopardy of being called out because she left before the catch.

(If you disbelieve this, imagine a scenario where Susie leaves first base the moment a ball is caught, and all the other stuff in your scenario happens - she goes back and retouches 1st, even though she didn't have to... when they appeal at first, SHE IS NOT OUT.)

[rwest]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

This part is completely untrue. She is in jeopardy of being called out because she left before the catch.

(If you disbelieve this, imagine a scenario where Susie leaves first base the moment a ball is caught, and all the other stuff in your scenario happens - she goes back and retouches 1st, even though she didn't have to... when they appeal at first, SHE IS NOT OUT.)

She is in jeopardy because she left early BUT is still in jeopardy because the retouch was illegal.

The point I am making is there are other things that are illegal to do that we don't prevent. The same logic should apply to unreported subs and illegal subs. And this retouch is illegal.

[AtlUmpSteve]

NCAA directs us to use preventative officiating to advise a coach that a lineup is innaccurate, or a substitution is illegal, and attempt to prevent it. But, if the coach insists, accept it, and let the opponent have the opportunity to take advantage.

Just as has been preached in most other associations.

With respect to an unreported sub, that should be treated as an appeal play. Not reported to you, so you cannot comment on it until asked.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

NCAA directs us to use preventative officiating to advise a coach that a lineup is innaccurate, or a substitution is illegal, and attempt to prevent it. But, if the coach insists, accept it, and let the opponent have the opportunity to take advantage.

Just as has been preached in most other associations.

With respect to an unreported sub, that should be treated as an appeal play. Not reported to you, so you cannot comment on it until asked.

Usually when I see Steve has replied after me in a thread I open it with a little mixture of fear and trepidation knowing that he is going to tell me I'm wrong. Imagine my surprise when Steve actually agrees with me. Or maybe, I should say I agree with him!

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by rwest

Usually when I see Steve has replied after me in a thread I open it with a little mixture of fear and trepidation knowing that he is going to tell me I'm wrong. Imagine my surprise when Steve actually agrees with me. Or maybe, I should say I agree with him!

I agree entirely... and now, based on his and Irish's remarks, I will no longer be trying to prevent an unreported sub.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I agree entirely... and now, based on his and Irish's remarks, I will no longer be trying to prevent an unreported sub.

And my remarks meant nothing to you?!?!?!?!?