NFHS Substitution Question

[fastpitch]

Our HS season is just starting - 2007 NFHS rules.

Coach starts with 9 and Flex listed last and DP indicated. In third inning she substitutes for the Flex (#7 for #8) and tells me her DP will be pitching. I note the sub and asked her if she was sure she wanted to sub for the Flex. I also suggested she be sure the Flex is on the field playing defense. Next inning she wants the Flex to bat for the pitcher (#2) she removed (in her mind). She said I meant to substitute for #2. I explained she has already made a substitution for the Flex and the only way she can bat is if she enters the game for the DP. She says, "the DP is pitching, I took # 2 out." I told her she did not take #2 out, she simply had the Flex and DP playing defense at same time and that she could have any 9 of the 10 playing defense as long as the Flex is one of them. There was no argument.

Did I get this right according to NFHS? Would there be any difference in ASA?

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by fastpitch

Did I get this right according to NFHS? Would there be any difference in ASA?

Yes, and no.

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by fastpitch

Our HS season is just starting - 2007 NFHS rules.

Coach starts with 9 and Flex listed last and DP indicated. In third inning she substitutes for the Flex (#7 for #8) and tells me her DP will be pitching. I note the sub and asked her if she was sure she wanted to sub for the Flex. I also suggested she be sure the Flex is on the field playing defense.

Despite the substitution that was made, there would be no strict requirement for the FLEX to play defense as long as the umpire was informed of this. The team would simply have 9 players - the 9 that take the field.

The "new" FLEX player would be out of the game for the time being; but could be reentered at any time.

Next inning she wants the Flex to bat for the pitcher (#2) she removed (in her mind). She said I meant to substitute for #2. I explained she has already made a substitution for the Flex and the only way she can bat is if she enters the game for the DP. She says, "the DP is pitching, I took # 2 out." I told her she did not take #2 out, she simply had the Flex and DP playing defense at same time and that she could have any 9 of the 10 playing defense as long as the Flex is one of them. There was no argument.

Did I get this right according to NFHS? Would there be any difference in ASA?

It sounds like you understand the DP/FLEX thing pretty well - probably better than most coaches and umpires.

But the mere fact that you had to ask a question about, what SHOULD be, a simple substitution rule, tells you all you need to know about the DP/FLEX rule. It's too complicated for most people.

Wouldn't it be nicer if a team could simply allow two players to occupy the same spot in a 9-man lineup? Their names would appear side-by-side. Either one could bat in that spot (and that spot only), and either one (or both) could take the field. You could call them FLEX1 and FLEX2, for all it matters. It would be virtually impossible to make a mistake, even if you tried.

Simple. Easily understood. Easily implemented. No substitutions. Everybody is happy. And it essentially accomplishes the same thing as the current DP/FLEX rule, without the needless complications.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[Dakota]

I don't find the DP/FLEX rule to be particularly complicated. True, it is more complicated than an EP rule, but, then it is also more complicated than just allowing the team to bat the roster with unlimited subs on defense. Why not just do that?

[Steve M]

I admit - again - it took me a full season to really get a handle around the DP/Flex (then DEFO) rule. I think this was back in 86/87 - so the wording of the rule was not as clear as it is now and many folks did not have a great understanding (I suspect because they too were making it way to complex). The reason it took me so long was that I was making it too complicated. When I slowed down, took one thing at a time, and learned better lineup card management - the DP/Flex became very easy.

Fastpitch - like Tom said - you got it right for Fed and ASA is identical.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Steve M

I was making it too complicated. When I slowed down, took one thing at a time, and learned better lineup card management - the DP/Flex became very easy.

Ding Ding, - the winner !!!!

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by Dakota

I don't find the DP/FLEX rule to be particularly complicated. True, it is more complicated than an EP rule, but, then it is also more complicated than just allowing the team to bat the roster with unlimited subs on defense. Why not just do that?

Because that is not remotely in the spirit of what the ASA intended with the DP/FLEX rule.

Besides, batting the roster is inherently unfair since one team may have 15 players whereas the other may only have 10. The team with only 10 can have their best hitters bat more frequently.

Fundamentally, the way it is now, the DP and FLEX are two halves that make a whole. The DP can still play defense and the FLEX can still bat. Instead of having all these hard-to-remember stipulations, why not truly make them two players who occupy the same spot in the lineup?

The way it is now ...

1) The DP can play defense, and it doesn't count as a substitution provided the FLEX is also playing defense.

2) Yet, the DP can play defense without the FLEX still out there provided the umpire is informed. The FLEX would be out of the game.

3) The DP can stay on the bench while still participating on offense.

Everything above would still be true with my proposal, except there would be no substitution involved. One, or both, could play defense at any time. Simple. You don't even have to tell the umpire. They're both on the lineup card.

The way it is now ...

4) The FLEX can bat, but she has to bat in the DP's spot. When that happens the FLEX no longer occupies the obscure "10th spot" in the lineup. The team goes from 10 to 9 players at this point. This is a substitution. The DP can return (this is a reentry), but she has to return to the same spot and then the FLEX returns to the Netherworld of the "10th spot". Back to 10 players.

With my proposal, either of the two players can bat in that spot in the lineup. No substitution is required since, on the lineup card, they both occupy that spot.

Isn't that essentially the way it is now - they both have to occupy the same spot in the lineup? The only difference is that there is no substitution required.

None of this 10 to 9, then 9 to 10, move from the 10th spot to the 3rd spot then back to the 10th spot. Inform the umpire about the substitution and then the retry... etc.

My proposed method is both logical, in the spirit of the DP/FLEX rule as currently written, and intuitive.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[Dakota]

You've essentially proposed the DP/FLEX become a half-EP, that's all. But, have fun with your proposal - now all you need is someone to sponsor it at the next NFHS rules committee meeting.

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by Dakota

You've essentially proposed the DP/FLEX become a half-EP, that's all. But, have fun with your proposal - now all you need is someone to sponsor it at the next NFHS rules committee meeting.

Half-EP? I like that!

Yes, that seems to be a pretty good description. But, unlike an EP, the "extra player" doesn't require an extra spot in the batting lineup.

I'm not holding my breath for anybody to embrace this rule. Rulesmakers are very protective over their rules. They don't embrace the notion that there is a better (and more understandable) way to do what they've originally created.

The DP/FLEX rule, as it stands, requires a lot of thinking ... a lot of bookkeeping on everybody's part ... substitutions become brainteasers, and few teams take full use of it mostly because they are uncomfortable with it. And that's because they don't fully understand it.

I would say most teams that use it - use it as nothing more than a DH.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by Dakota

You've essentially proposed the DP/FLEX become a half-EP, that's all. But, have fun with your proposal - now all you need is someone to sponsor it at the next NFHS rules committee meeting.

Resurrecting an old thread.

And look what happened! The NCAA is implementing an experimental rule that is exactly as I proposed it back in 2006 when I wrote a 3-part article on officiating.com as a superior alternative to the highly convoluted DP/FLEX rule.

http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/fi...e-%20Links.pdf

Much simpler! Far superior! Two players share the same spot in the line-up. Either one can bat in that spot. Either one can play the field. Either one can run for the other. And, when they do this "switching", it is never a substitution. The two players are inextricably linked together. They are one-in-the-same player.

It accomplishes everything the DP/FLEX rule did, but without all the complications of going back and forth between 9 and 10 players and tracking how many times somebody has reentered.