NCAA DP/Flex scenario

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by Andy

I think I may be missing something here....

The starting player in FLEX position enters the game when the lineup is accepted.

That player leaves the game when replaced on defense by the DP.

Coach wants to reinstate the FLEX postion with a player from the bench that is not the starting FLEX player.

At this point, doesn't the starting FLEX player have to re-enter the game to be substituted for? If this is correct then the starting FLEX player has used her re-entry and cannot come back into the game.

Please note the following Approved Ruling from "Ask Dee". It actually refers to the inverse situation (FLEX playing offense for DP), but makes clear that the position remains to be filled by any eligible substitute even if the starter CANNOT re-enter. This is what most have understood from the beginning of time.

DP/Flex
A.R.8.2^1: If the starting DP gets on base and is replaced by the Flex to run the bases twice in a single game, the DP is then unable to
play for its remainder (starter who has re-entered). If that spot (the one the DP originally occupied but the Flex currently holds) in the
batting order comes up again, may the coach substitute for the DP even though there has been no one in that position for some time or
must he/she substitute for the Flex?
RULING: Once the starting lineup is created with a DP and Flex, those positions exist throughout the game even if one of them is temporarily vacant or inactive. The Flex who entered the game to run for the DP is still the Flex and retains all those rights. The DP position still exists and a substitute may be entered in that spot in the batting order. The number of available (but not necessarily in use) spots never changes…there are either nine or 10 and that cannot change throughout the course of the game. The coach may decide whether to substitute for the DP or Flex based on which player is needed in the lineup or which starter should retain her reentry rights but whatever the reason, it is imperative the coach articulates which player the substitute is for and that that decision is clearly passed along to the scorer and opposing coach.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

Please note the following Approved Ruling from "Ask Dee". It actually refers to the inverse situation (FLEX playing offense for DP), but makes clear that the position remains to be filled by any eligible substitute even if the starter CANNOT re-enter. This is what most have understood from the beginning of time.

DP/Flex
A.R.8.2^1: If the starting DP gets on base and is replaced by the Flex to run the bases twice in a single game, the DP is then unable to
play for its remainder (starter who has re-entered). If that spot (the one the DP originally occupied but the Flex currently holds) in the
batting order comes up again, may the coach substitute for the DP even though there has been no one in that position for some time or
must he/she substitute for the Flex?
RULING: Once the starting lineup is created with a DP and Flex, those positions exist throughout the game even if one of them is temporarily vacant or inactive. The Flex who entered the game to run for the DP is still the Flex and retains all those rights. The DP position still exists and a substitute may be entered in that spot in the batting order. The number of available (but not necessarily in use) spots never changes…there are either nine or 10 and that cannot change throughout the course of the game. The coach may decide whether to substitute for the DP or Flex based on which player is needed in the lineup or which starter should retain her reentry rights but whatever the reason, it is imperative the coach articulates which player the substitute is for and that that decision is clearly passed along to the scorer and opposing coach.

Okay, so now I'm confused. Are you suggesting that the original Flex in the OP was not re-entered and then removed a second time when the substitute Flex entered the game?

[Big Slick]

Originally Posted by Manny A

Okay, so now I'm confused. Are you suggesting that the original Flex in the OP was not re-entered and then removed a second time when the substitute Flex entered the game?

Yes. Allow me to annotate the OP (#10 is starting DP, #15 is starting flex):

Or:
coach: blue, #10 is playing defense for the flex (#15)
PU: #10 on defense for the flex. Like this (showing line up card to coach)?
coach: yes
Next inning
coach: blue, #25 is now my flex
PU: Is she playing defense only? (or some other type of question to make sure exactly what type of change the coach wants to make, also verifying positions as NCAA requires positions as part of an accurate line up card).
coach: yes, the DP will not play defense.
PU: #25 is now flex, DP to offense only. Like this (showing line up card to coach)?
coach: yes
Next inning
coach: #15 re-enters as my flex
PU: #15 re-enters. Like this (showing line up card to coach)?
coach: yes.

And yes, you should show and verify all line up card changes to the coach in NCAA.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by Manny A

Okay, so now I'm confused. Are you suggesting that the original Flex in the OP was not re-entered and then removed a second time when the substitute Flex entered the game?

Restating what Big Slick stated, in complete agreement.

Yes, the starting FLEX does NOT have to re-enter to re-establish the FLEX position; as stated in the Approved Ruling, once the game starts with 10 positions, they all exist, even when one is currently vacant ("down to nine"). Any eligible sub can fill that position, just as the starting FLEX could re-enter (but didn't in the case questioned).

Let's look at the process. If the #5 batter #22 playing F3 is replaced by sub #21, and then #21 is replaced by sub #33, has #22 lost eligibility to re-enter? Was she "in effect" re-entered just so #33 could enter? No, and no. Logical subs in sequence do not deprive starter #22 of her re-entry right.

Well, it isn't any different in the OP. FLEX came out, replaced by DP. A different FLEX is legally entered to fill that spot; it doesn't deprive the starter of her re-entry right. All starters have re-entry rights, including DP and FLEX.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

Restating what Big Slick stated, in complete agreement.

Yes, the starting FLEX does NOT have to re-enter to re-establish the FLEX position; as stated in the Approved Ruling, once the game starts with 10 positions, they all exist, even when one is currently vacant ("down to nine"). Any eligible sub can fill that position, just as the starting FLEX could re-enter (but didn't in the case questioned).

Let's look at the process. If the #5 batter #22 playing F3 is replaced by sub #21, and then #21 is replaced by sub #33, has #22 lost eligibility to re-enter? Was she "in effect" re-entered just so #33 could enter? No, and no. Logical subs in sequence do not deprive starter #22 of her re-entry right.

Well, it isn't any different in the OP. FLEX came out, replaced by DP. A different FLEX is legally entered to fill that spot; it doesn't deprive the starter of her re-entry right. All starters have re-entry rights, including DP and FLEX.

This isn't any different in any of the other codes right?

Relatedly, if the flex is out and the coach wants to substitute for her with the intention of having her go back to playing defense later would you allow it or call it a projected sub?

[RKBUmp]

If the rules required the Flex or DP to be re-entered before they could be substituted for, it would essentially kill the DP/Flex positions once one of the players re-entry was burned.

Example, Flex bats for DP, DP has left the game. original DP re-enters and next inning coach bats the Flex for the DP again, DP has left the game and has burned her re-entry. If the original DP has to be re-entered before they can be subsituted for, how could you possibly do it after burning their re-entry? This would kill the DP/Flex and restrict the game to 9 players the rest of the game.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by youngump

This isn't any different in any of the other codes right?

Relatedly, if the flex is out and the coach wants to substitute for her with the intention of having her go back to playing defense later would you allow it or call it a projected sub?

Don't see how you got to a projected substitute on this without an insinuation of reading the coach's mind.

A projected substitute is one reported prior to the point in time at which the coach desires it to come into effect.