Fair-Foul Question and other questions

[Dakota]

I understand, but the phraseology of "what ever happened to..." implies to me that this is the "right" way. Not true, except in NCAA.

Personally, I will allow any substitute to be entered at any time for any player currently in the game. The change is official at that time. So, if the OC informs me of a change to what would be his fourth batter due up that inning, and only 3 batters bat before there are 3 outs, and then he wants to change his mind about #4, then its "coach, you want to re-enter your starter, correct?"

This has game flow and efficiency advantages and no disadvantages. If the coach does not know the numbers and names of the players on his team, not allowing the changes "at this time" won't fix that.

A projected change means there is an "if" or a "when" that delays the official change in the lineup in there somewhere. In my example, above, if the coach says "If we get to batter #4, I want to...", sorry, coach, no projected changes.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by Dakota

I understand, but the phraseology of "what ever happened to..." implies to me that this is the "right" way. Not true, except in NCAA.

Personally, I will allow any substitute to be entered at any time for any player currently in the game. The change is official at that time. So, if the OC informs me of a change to what would be his fourth batter due up that inning, and only 3 batters bat before there are 3 outs, and then he wants to change his mind about #4, then its "coach, you want to re-enter your starter, correct?"

This has game flow and efficiency advantages and no disadvantages. If the coach does not know the numbers and names of the players on his team, not allowing the changes "at this time" won't fix that.

A projected change means there is an "if" or a "when" that delays the official change in the lineup in there somewhere. In my example, above, if the coach says "If we get to batter #4, I want to...", sorry, coach, no projected changes.

I will add something to this. I took the change when the offensive team came up. I do not ask if this is the first, second or third batter in the inning. When the coach tells me that X is going to bat for Y I accept that change. I don't keep track of which batter is the first one up that inning and I highly doubt that anyone else does either, unless there is an unusual circumstance such as #12 getting called out for leaving early while #6 is in the batters box. In that case now I do make a note that #6 should be the first batter and tell both home and visitors scorekeepers that #6 will be the first scheduled batter.

I do agree with Dakota, that if the coach says "If we get to" then I am not accepting the change until we get to the actual IF referenced.

The rule in question covering "projected substitutions is (was as of 2013 book):3-3-3. The rulebook does not define a projected substitution. To me a projected substitution is the "If" statement.

A defensive substitution can not occur until the actual change is made, because all of the players are actively on the field (unless using the DP/Flex) at the time, therefore a substitution must actually occur at that point.

When the team is on offense, only 1 player is actively at bat at the time, so you can substitute players into the lineup when the ball is dead.

There is nothing in the rule that says an offensive substitution can only be made when the actual batter comes up.

My take on a projected substitution is that the coach is going to make a future change when his team is on defense. For example, the OC says #12 is batting for #24. #24 will re-enter when we go on defense. That is projecting a future substitution.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by Umpteenth

I'm just curious, but if "This was just one of those games with all sorts of strange things", how is it you were on the plate for most of them, but also on the bases?

Should have been double header, not game. Sorry for those who couldn't figure that out.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Please don't take offense to this ... but like several of your blogs on this site, most of these "strange" situations are not strange at all. They shouldn't strike you as strange, or unusual.

1 - move as much as you have to to make the best call you can.
2 - 21/8/4 ... but another example of why some will not take projected subs.This is not a projected sub, this is taking a change to the lineup that is effective immediately upon my announcement of the change to the opposing coach.
3 - nothing odd here, and you called it right.
4 - nothing odd here, and you called it right.
5 - shame on your "partner".

PS ... why are you changing positions during a game?

See the red comment, and the comment above.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Need a definition, here you go:

Projected substitution/re-entry - A reported change to take effect at a future point in time (i.e., not immediately).

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Need a definition, here you go:

Projected substitution/re-entry - A reported change to take effect at a future point in time (i.e., not immediately).

Unfortunately, even that doesn't nail it down. "take effect" means one thing to chap and Dakota, and something else to me and whoever else will only take the next batter (or current runners) changes. And both sides are reasonable interpretations.

I see Chap's and Dakota's argument on this. I don't agree with it, but I also don't insist the way I see it is the only possible way to see it (or vice versa of course).

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Unfortunately, even that doesn't nail it down. "take effect" means one thing to chap and Dakota, and something else to me and whoever else will only take the next batter (or current runners) changes. And both sides are reasonable interpretations.

I see Chap's and Dakota's argument on this. I don't agree with it, but I also don't insist the way I see it is the only possible way to see it (or vice versa of course).

"take effect" can only mean one thing, whatever it is, is now, not later. IMO, arguing that point is going beyond the argument for argument's sake, and that is something with which I am familiar

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Need a definition, here you go:

Projected substitution/re-entry - A reported change to take effect at a future point in time (i.e., not immediately).

2015 casebook, situation 3.3.2 Situation B

Coach of Team A tells the plate umpire that L. Jones will bat for B. Smith and that J. Johnson will replace D. Lee in left field the next time on defense.

Ruling: The umpire shall accept the substitution of L. Jones for B. Smith. However, No substitution shall be made until which time as the substitution is actually made. Therefore, the umpire will tell the coach of Team A to wait until his/her team is on defense before reporting any defensive substitution.

What this case play does not cover is where in the order the substitution of L. Jones for B. Smith is. We only know this is when the team is on offense. It can be inferred by the wording the team is on offense when the two substitution requests are made.


Also, where in the rulebook is your definition of Projected substitution, as I have yet to find that anywhere in the rulebook.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

"take effect" can only mean one thing, whatever it is, is now, not later. IMO, arguing that point is going beyond the argument for argument's sake, and that is something with which I am familiar

The substitution does take effect immediately when it is announced. The substitute player is now the player legally in the lineup at the time, thus the substitution has taken effect. If a player other than that player comes to bat, we have an issue.

One other thing to consider. Does it say anywhere in the rules, except in the portion of the rules pertaining to pitchers and catcher for the purposes of a courtesy runner, that a player must actually participate in the game after substituting into the game?

Let's look at one scenario.

R1 on first, two outs. 0-0 count on S4, who has been announced as the substitute for B4. R1 is called out for leaving early. Now S4's coach comes out and wants to put B4 back into the game. Has S4 ever entered the game? Did she actually participate? Even though S4 never actually participate in any play (the out, and no pitch mean she was never actually participating any an aspect of the game), she did use an entry into the game.

(I actually had something similar to this happen last season, and the coach tried arguing that she never entered the game).

[robbie]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

(I actually had something similar to this happen last season, and the coach tried arguing that she never entered the game).

Chapmaja:
Where do you ump? I really have to go watch some of these games.
I've been doing fast pitch for 15 years and you see more odd occurances every weekend that I have experienced in my career......

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

The substitution does take effect immediately when it is announced. The substitute player is now the player legally in the lineup at the time, thus the substitution has taken effect...

Exactly.

I have no issue with umpires using the NCAA interpretation in non-NCAA games. It is not wrong. I just don't view the rule as requiring that, and it wastes time.

[MD Longhorn]

I think it's a little funny that Chap is arguing with Mike, while Mike is supporting Chap's side of the discussion...

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

2015 casebook, situation 3.3.2 Situation B

Coach of Team A tells the plate umpire that L. Jones will bat for B. Smith and that J. Johnson will replace D. Lee in left field the next time on defense.

Ruling: The umpire shall accept the substitution of L. Jones for B. Smith. However, No substitution shall be made until which time as the substitution is actually made. Therefore, the umpire will tell the coach of Team A to wait until his/her team is on defense before reporting any defensive substitution.

What this case play does not cover is where in the order the substitution of L. Jones for B. Smith is. We only know this is when the team is on offense. It can be inferred by the wording the team is on offense when the two substitution requests are made.

For as much as we know from the OP, maybe Lee just completed her turn at bat and the coach mistakenly included the bold portion which may actually been irrelevant to the change being made.

Because a coach can (and they do) change their mind, I would inform the coach to submit that change when s/he desires it to occur and not be specific about it needing to be the next half of the inning.

Also, where in the rulebook is your definition of Projected substitution, as I have yet to find that anywhere in the rulebook.

It is in the Micro Management rule book.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

For as much as we know from the OP, maybe Lee just completed her turn at bat and the coach mistakenly included the bold portion which may actually been irrelevant to the change being made.

Because a coach can (and they do) change their mind, I would inform the coach to submit that change when s/he desires it to occur and not be specific about it needing to be the next half of the inning.





It is in the Micro Management rule book.

Fair enough about the micromanagement rulebook.

Also, I have NEVER seen a coach change their mind

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

Also, I have NEVER seen a coach change their mind

Given the number of incredibly bizarre things that seem to happen in your games... this stuns me.

I have definitely seen coaches both TRY to change their mind ... and succeed in changing their minds.

The most dramatic "try" to change their mind I can recall. About 15 years ago. Home Coach, who is leading, tells one of my umpires #10 for #4 as they are switching sides for them to bat. This was a semi-final of a tourney. Coach only has 10 players, and this is likely the final inning (apparently) due to time limit. #4 was due up 4th.

#1 out. #2 out. #3 hits a triple... tries to stretch it into a run - gets caught in a run-down and twists her ankle getting out. She can't continue, but all this happened so quickly that the game did not, in fact, end.

Coach tries to "unsubstitute" 4 back in for 10 so 10 can replace the injured #3. Sorry coach. You don't have 9? You forfeit. He got ejected before his assistant protested, to no avail. Other team to the final.

(And yes... after the tourney around the post-tourney umpire meal he gets told by almost everyone he should not have accepted that sub at that time.)

I've seen NUMEROUS instances of coaches succeeding in undoing a "projected" sub (not always injury ... most often a projected sub for a 4th or later batter in the inning where they didn't get to batter 4, so umpire undid the sub since they never really got there), and yes, I had a little chat with the umpire afterward.