Jump to content

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member
David3

Batting out of order situation

Recommended Posts

Is the ruling correct in a manual?

A Situation K6 (page 188) in the Wendelstedt's Rules and Interpretations Manual 2016.

Batting order: A - B - C - D - E - F - G - H - I

"No one on, no outs, no count. Hooker is due up, however, Baker comes to bat. After two pitches, Baker knocks a base hit to right field. Irwin then comes to bat and walks on four pitches. Abel then moves Baker and Irwin up on a sacrifice bunt. After Abel is put out, the defense appeals to the plate umpire that the offense is batting out of order.

Ruling: Charles is called out and Abel's out is nullified. Baker is returned to second base and Irwin to first. The next proper batter is Daniel."

My interpretation: When is first pitch made on Irwin, Baker is legalized and a proper batter is Charles but Irwin is at bat. Irwin is walked and first pitch on Abel legalized Irwin's start. Abel is proper batter and the defese appeal is irrelevant. I think that the interpretation in the manual is correct before the pitch on Abel. Am I wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member
2 minutes ago, David3 said:

Is the ruling correct in a manual?

A Situation K6 (page 188) in the Wendelstedt's Rules and Interpretations Manual 2016.

Batting order: A - B - C - D - E - F - G - H - I

"No one on, no outs, no count. Hooker is due up, however, Baker comes to bat. After two pitches, Baker knocks a base hit to right field. Irwin then comes to bat and walks on four pitches. Abel then moves Baker and Irwin up on a sacrifice bunt. After Abel is put out, the defense appeals to the plate umpire that the offense is batting out of order.

Ruling: Charles is called out and Abel's out is nullified. Baker is returned to second base and Irwin to first. The next proper batter is Daniel."

My interpretation: When is first pitch made on Irwin, Baker is legalized and a proper batter is Charles but Irwin is at bat. Irwin is walked and first pitch on Abel legalized Irwin's start. Abel is proper batter and the defese appeal is irrelevant. I think that the interpretation in the manual is correct before the pitch on Abel. Am I wrong?

How did we get to Charles if we started in the H hole? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, David3 said:

Is the ruling correct in a manual?

A Situation K6 (page 188) in the Wendelstedt's Rules and Interpretations Manual 2016.

Batting order: A - B - C - D - E - F - G - H - I

"No one on, no outs, no count. Hooker is due up, however, Baker comes to bat. After two pitches, Baker knocks a base hit to right field. Irwin then comes to bat and walks on four pitches. Abel then moves Baker and Irwin up on a sacrifice bunt. After Abel is put out, the defense appeals to the plate umpire that the offense is batting out of order.

Ruling: Charles is called out and Abel's out is nullified. Baker is returned to second base and Irwin to first. The next proper batter is Daniel."

My interpretation: When is first pitch made on Irwin, Baker is legalized and a proper batter is Charles but Irwin is at bat. Irwin is walked and first pitch on Abel legalized Irwin's start. Abel is proper batter and the defense appeal is irrelevant. I think that the interpretation in the manual is correct before the pitch on Abel. Am I wrong?

I agree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Mr. noumpere stated, this question was discussed before. It was in a thread that started on September 30, 2014 and it was actually answered by someone from the Wendelstedt school. Here’s that reply in its entirety--

“This was an error that has since been corrected in the manual update. The answer was switched with another question. The answer to K6 should read:

“Ruling: The pitch to Abel legalized Irwin's time at bat. The next proper batter is Abel. Since he completed his time at bat in the proper position, there is no violation. Baker would be the next proper batter, but since he is on base, Charles is the next batter due up.

“Sorry about the confusion. This play was supposed to reference the casebook that instructs umpires how to proceed with the next proper batter already on base. This will be in the errata and update sheet coming out in December.”

So, David3, you were right to question the play because it was wrong. And thanks to Mr. noumpere for his great memory.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×