Courtesy runner; unreported sub runner
 

First, I wish that the piece about the courtesy runner that is in Rule 8-10 was included as part of Rule 4. But anyhoos...

This may have been discussed in an earlier string, but I was unable to locate it.

Doesn't it appear that the penalty for an unreported CR is much harsher than a normal unreported substitute runner? If a coach was very rules knowledgeable and was confronted with that situation, it might be to his advantage to not claim the sub was a CR but rather a normal substitution.

Has there been any discussion at the upper levels to get these to be more in balance? Why so harsh on the CR not reporting?

8-10-G: A courtesy runner must be reported to the plate umpire.
EFFECT: - If a courtesy runner fails to report or violates the courtesy runner rule they are considered an illegal runner and shall be disqualified.

4-6-C: A substitute who enters the game without reporting is considered an unreported substitute:

-5. When a runner and that runner is brought to the attention of the umpire BEFORE a pitch, legal or illegal, or a play made:
EFFECT: No penalty. Replace the unreported substitute with the correct player or enter them as a legal substitute.
-6. When a runner and that runner is protested AFTER a pitch, legal or illegal, or a play made:
EFFECT: The runner is officially in the game. Any advance of the runner(s) is legal.

There doesn't seem to be any real penalty for an unreported sub that is a runner.

Wait, are you expecting full consistency in the rules? ? :eek: ;)

Obviously different authors, different time.

I have though a few times about your Rule 4 point, but I guess they think (?) as a CR is not a sub, it only applies to a running situation. Again, one specific author, off & "running" on his/her own.

CR doesn't eat up a substitution and reentry on that pitcher or catcher that was being run for. Seems losing a sub/reentry for one of those two crucial players might be more important to the coach than losing that runner for the rest of the game.

And/or that CR might be the shut-down closer coach was "saving" for the right opportunity. When the slow-afoot pitcher/catcher reached 3B with less than 2 out the best option was that exact player.

Point is, each situation has to be judged on its own merit. You can't throw out one argument with the bath water.

Added edit: I also think that the coach ends up burning a re-entry (if there is still one available) once the DQ'd CR leaves and the original player has to return to the base (or another legitimate substitution).

My opinion, the importance of each is pretty much beside the point.

The courtesy runner rule existed in its' current state when an unreported sub resulted in a disqualification of that player. When the unreported sub rules were changed to basically excuse and absolve the coaches' mistake (one occasionally even done intentionally to illegal re-use players not reported in a different place), no one addressed the courtesy runner rule; so until corrected, it is an island of inconsistency.