I'm pretty sure that this quote is an argument for both positions here. Someone posted the ruling for NCAA that says that a sub can't be entered until they will actually play. I know of no such ruling for ASA or NFHS (which is scant evidence for their lack of existence.) Absent a ruling like the NCAA's, I would assume that projected subs means what it normally means, subs that will only be made in the future.
Suppose that a team is using a DP/Flex. And in the top half of the inning the home coach comes to you and says I want to put in 13 for my Flex and she's now going to bat for the DP. Are you really only taking half that change because the second half doesn't take effect?

What I find interesting is every case play I have come across for projected substitutions always deals with trying to make 2 moves with the same player. Not one of them refers to taking multiple offensive substitutions.

I agree and I believe many are overthinking the whole thing.

It isn't that hard. When the coach gives you a change, that change is effective then. Immediately. Not when they come to bat, go into the field, take a trip to the head, but NOW.

Doesn't make a difference if it is one player or eight, the coach can make whatever changes s/he please, but when they do, those changes are effective immediately. If the coach tries to involve the same player in two changes, you stop them and refuse to take the change. Tell the coach to give you the change when s/he wants it to become effective.

ditto

Logically speaking, I agree with that philosophy. However, I've posed this at both ASA and NFHS clinics and was told in no uncertain terms not to do it that way.

I've mentioned before that I was dinged on an NFHS evaluation for taking a sub for the second batter due up that inning.

I believe that if the coach tells me that Sally is going in for Sue and isn't due up until the 7th batter of the upcoming inning, that that change should be legitimate. But I've been told not to do that.

Tomorrow, when a coach tells me "17 for 10, in the #2 spot", I am going to have to hold back a huge goofy grin and try not to think about this post.

Speaking ASA

I can state with a clear conscience that those clinicians are misinformed or just outright wrong. The coach has the right to make any legal change to their line up at any time. ANY TIME. If a coach wants to put #2 in for #4 in the 6th position in the line up, I don't give a damn if they are due up this inning, next inning or just grounded out to the pitcher, the umpire should enter #2 in the 6th position in the line up. #2 is now in the game and #4 is out. End of story. No more discussion to be had, it is a done deal. And barring the possibility it is an illegal sub, the umpire hasn't the authority to not make the change.

Again, and I don't know how many times I can state this, all changes are effective immediately. The change not allowed is when the coach wants a change to be effective in the future. THAT is a projected change and what is not acceptable in any game I know.

As previously stated, it should not be that difficult to understand

I have the feeling that some clinicians are so afraid of sounding like projected subs are ok, that they are over-reacting to the question. :rolleyes:

The response above, from highly qualified clinicians and others should be enough to make the substitution process obvious and clear! :cool:

The arguement I always hear for not doing it is, "but what if the coach changes batters 2, 5 & 6 using the rest of his subs, burns the reentry of one of his starters and then batter #5 gets injured and cant continue? This is to protect the coach from running into that problem." Why is it our job to protect the coach? He has to do it to create his starting lineup, what difference does it make if he wants to do it later? If he wants to make those changes and risk having a problem with his subs, that is his problem, not ours.

ditto

One of the reasons you always repeat the changes back to the coach to ensure accuracy and it gives the coach the opportunity to hear it out loud. You know how it is when something inside your head sounds great and then you actually hear or see your idea in action and think, "What the hell was I thinking?" Some coaches are just that way. I've had coaches hear it and say, "no, that isn't what I want to do" and correct it. Saves all parties a lot of headaches down the road

The most common "projected" sub is the reentry.

Coach: "Blue I got 10 hitting for 15 then 10 will reenter.

Me: "Coach I'll accept the first change now. Let me know the other change when you are ready for it to happen."

Also to avoid "oopsie" mistakes that can be a headache later when I repeat back subs to the coach I use names on the lineup. "So I've got 10 Sally Jones hitting for 15 Katie Smith, right Coach?"

I understand and agree with Irish et al on this, but does your opinion conflict with NCAA's definition of "projected sub"? I'm just starting in NCAA work & want to get it right (it's great to work with coaches who actually know how to work the lineup and DP/Flex rule)

See post #8 for the NCAA approved ruling. In NCAA you cannot accept an offensive sub until they are actually coming to bat.

You might want to inform your clinicians of this... as they (ASA) have not been teaching it this way.

The funny thing is ... I've seen clinicians say you should take a sub on a batter that is sure to come up this inning (batting 1st, 2nd, 3rd at the beginning of a new half inning, for example) but not one that may or may not bat this inning (4th batter of a fresh inning ... or 2nd batter up with 1 out and a runner on, for example)... yet other clinicians simply say the sub must be the NEXT batter and the next batter only.

But none of the ASA clinics I've attended to have said you should take, as Mike suggests, 8 subs and put them all in right then.