BOO or Ineligible Player

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

Got me thinking, though... the 1st time around, when it wasn't caught, the Flex was absolutely an ineligible player when she batted instead of B1. Is this handled the same as other ineligibles, where even if it's discovered innings later, the rule is enforced and the player is now restricted to the bench?

But how would one prove, a couple innings later, that something like that happened?

[jmkupka]

When DC comes out to appeal the BOO, the still-clueless OC (before being enlightened) states something to the effect that "this is what we did 2 innings ago..."

Unfortunately, PU can't say, "before you shoot yourself in the foot, OC, let me sort out this BOO appeal"

[MD Longhorn]

I can see that, but you wouldn't believe a coach telling you something that happened in his favor 2 innings ago, so I can't see believing him accurately telling me what he did wrong either.

[jmkupka]

Good point... that would be my "out" should the DC insist.

Just to clarify, OC was saying "this is what we did 2 innings ago" to defend what he thought was a non-BOO...

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

Good point... that would be my "out" should the DC insist.

Just to clarify, OC was saying "this is what we did 2 innings ago" to defend what he thought was a non-BOO...

Yes, I got that. And to DC ... no one pointed anything out in the first inning. And now he's likely just saying that because he thinks it will get him out of trouble right now. We have no way to verify that actually happened that way in first inning.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Yes, I got that. And to DC ... no one pointed anything out in the first inning. And now he's likely just saying that because he thinks it will get him out of trouble right now. We have no way to verify that actually happened that way in first inning.

What if the scorekeepers put the details in the book?

[MD Longhorn]

I suppose that if the scorekeeper in this game was neutral and someone we could trust was completely accurate, then the correct ruling would be restricting at the point the infraction was caught, even after the fact.