Trivia 4

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by nopachunts

What age?

If 12U or above I would eject the 3BC for unsportsmanlike conduct. Put the runners on the correct base and go on. The HC, if he/she is not already gone, will have a VERY short leash if they object.
If younger than 12, put the runners on the correct base and tell the HC not to let it happen again.

In either case, if the runner(s) advanced on the sac fly, I would put the runner(s) back to the TOP base.

In ASA, that action on your part is not supported by any rule.

[RKBUmp]

8-7-Y makes no mention of an intervening play. It says each runner on an improper base shall be declared out. Even if there was a play before it was caught, the runners who switched are still on an improper base.

[SAump]

BR is out as a result of playing action.
R1 passing R2 on baseline is out before the pitch.
R2 returning to touch 1B, is also out before the pitch, travesty of the game.

Ruling same as NCAA, minus ejections.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by SAump

BR is out as a result of playing action.
R1 passing R2 on baseline is out before the pitch.
R2 returning to touch 1B, is also out before the pitch, travesty of the game.

Ruling same as NCAA, minus ejections.

Partially right result (3 outs), wrong reasons. Eject in Fed or ASA as well. Not positive on USFA.

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by SAump

Staying with ASA rules .......

BR is out as a result of playing action.
OK

R1 passing R2 on baseline is out before the pitch.
But this action occurred during a dead ball. Not sure if 8.7.D fits here. But if we can apply 8.7.D, do we call and signal R1 out prior to the pitch?

R2 returning to touch 1B, is also out before the pitch, travesty of the game.
I could be wrong, but I can't find a "travesty of the game" rule reference in the book. So are we supporting the out call of R2 with R/S#49, Sporting Behavior?

Ruling same as NCAA, minus ejections.
It's not the same ruling, not even close. NCAA has an AR (see Slick's earlier post) that covers this specific play.

An AR or interp from ASA would make all this a lot easier.

Separate from what's being asked in the OP, from a mechanics standpoint, what was the BU paying attention to during the conference???

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by RKBUmp

8-7-Y makes no mention of an intervening play. It says each runner on an improper base shall be declared out. Even if there was a play before it was caught, the runners who switched are still on an improper base.

Lacking any further interpretation, I agree, both are out and coach is gone.

[SRW]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Lacking any further interpretation, I agree, both are out and coach is gone.

I'm in slight disagreement, for the sake of discussion. This was not caught until after a play was made. 8-7-Y says "...following any conference" ... not a play. So in the OP, a play has gone by, and one runner has scored (not on any base.) I find it hard to enforce 8-7-Y after the play has been made.

However... arguing the other way, say the runners switch after the conference, and it's noted before a play. Switch them back, no harm, no foul. Nothing has been done at this point to offend the defense. Following this logic, the rule must be in the book to deal with the situation after a play.

Flopping back to my first point, when would we stop enforcing the rule? After 2 plays have gone by? One pitch?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by SRW

However... arguing the other way, say the runners switch after the conference, and it's noted before a play. Switch them back, no harm, no foul. Nothing has been done at this point to offend the defense. Following this logic, the rule must be in the book to deal with the situation after a play.

No harm, no foul? So you quote part of 8-7-Y, then advocate just switching them back when 8-7-Y happens? The ASA book is very clear on what to do if this is caught in time. 2 outs and an ejection (at least). Not "switch them back, no harm, no foul".

After a play - I understand your questioning of it. Part of me sees this like a BOO - too late to fix (although if I can't call the runners out because of the intervening play, I'm definitely tossing the coach). The other part of me sees stretching "following" to include this, after all, it doesn't say IMMEDIATELY following. I think I'm leaning toward the latter.

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

No harm, no foul? So you quote part of 8-7-Y, then advocate just switching them back when 8-7-Y happens? The ASA book is very clear on what to do if this is caught in time. 2 outs and an ejection (at least). Not "switch them back, no harm, no foul".

After a play - I understand your questioning of it. Part of me sees this like a BOO - too late to fix (although if I can't call the runners out because of the intervening play, I'm definitely tossing the coach). The other part of me sees stretching "following" to include this, after all, it doesn't say IMMEDIATELY following. I think I'm leaning toward the latter.

So if the EFFECT for 8.7.Y read something like.....

"Each runner on an improper base shall be declared out when such action is discovered by or brought to the umpire's attention by the defensive team prior to or after the completion of the at bat that was in effect during the offensive conference.
In addition the manager shall be ejected for unsportsmanlike conduct.

Would that adequately and fairly cover all scenarios?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by KJUmp

So if the EFFECT for 8.7.Y read something like.....

"Each runner on an improper base shall be declared out when such action is discovered by or brought to the umpire's attention by the defensive team prior to or after the completion of the at bat that was in effect during the offensive conference.
In addition the manager shall be ejected for unsportsmanlike conduct.

Would that adequately and fairly cover all scenarios?

Yes, if you can talk yourself into "following a conference" including "following a conference and an interceding play".

[SRW]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

No harm, no foul? So you quote part of 8-7-Y, then advocate just switching them back when 8-7-Y happens? The ASA book is very clear on what to do if this is caught in time. 2 outs and an ejection (at least). Not "switch them back, no harm, no foul".

After a play - I understand your questioning of it. Part of me sees this like a BOO - too late to fix (although if I can't call the runners out because of the intervening play, I'm definitely tossing the coach). The other part of me sees stretching "following" to include this, after all, it doesn't say IMMEDIATELY following. I think I'm leaning toward the latter.

My point in "no harm, no foul" is similar to having an improper batter at the plate - in the middle of the at-bat, you can replace the improper batter with the proper batter ... 'no harm, no foul.' While yes, 8-7-Y says we should have 2 outs and an ejection, my point is that, immediately following the conference and immediately prior to any play, why couldn't we put them back on the correct bases with "no harm, no foul?" The defense, at this point, hasn't been yet offended.

[RKBUmp]

So in other words the rule as stated would never be enforced? If no harm no foul before the pitch, and unenforceable after a pitch, just when do you enforce it?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by SRW

My point in "no harm, no foul" is similar to having an improper batter at the plate - in the middle of the at-bat, you can replace the improper batter with the proper batter ... 'no harm, no foul.' While yes, 8-7-Y says we should have 2 outs and an ejection, my point is that, immediately following the conference and immediately prior to any play, why couldn't we put them back on the correct bases with "no harm, no foul?" The defense, at this point, hasn't been yet offended.

Because the only no brainer on this question is that if this would have happened immediately following the conference and immediately prior to any play, you'd have 2 outs and ejection. When, exactly, would you apply 87Y if not then?

The ACTUAL difficult part of this question is whether we can enforce 87Y after a play.

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by SRW

My point in "no harm, no foul" is similar to having an improper batter at the plate - in the middle of the at-bat, you can replace the improper batter with the proper batter ... 'no harm, no foul.' While yes, 8-7-Y says we should have 2 outs and an ejection, my point is that, immediately following the conference and immediately prior to any play, why couldn't we put them back on the correct bases with "no harm, no foul?" The defense, at this point, hasn't been yet offended.

But the offense attempted to cheat.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by SRW

My point in "no harm, no foul" is similar to having an improper batter at the plate - in the middle of the at-bat, you can replace the improper batter with the proper batter ... 'no harm, no foul.' While yes, 8-7-Y says we should have 2 outs and an ejection, my point is that, immediately following the conference and immediately prior to any play, why couldn't we put them back on the correct bases with "no harm, no foul?" The defense, at this point, hasn't been yet offended.

OTOH, the rule does not include the words "immediately" or "play" in any capacity. This is one of the rules that was put in the book with an effect intentionally meant to be punitive. And even if a play did occur, you are still in a time period "after any conference"