Jump to content

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member
  • 0
Guest OceanBlue

Is this BOO ?

Question

Guest OceanBlue

In the middle of the game, B1 (proper B) leads off and gets a hit. B9 (improper B) makes an out. B2 comes to bat and gets a hit (B1 to 2B). Before the next pitched to B3, the defense appeal BOO (claiming that B2 batted in B1's spot). Because B9 became a proper batter (with a pitch to B2), B1 should be the next proper batter, but B1 is on 2B. 

Is this BOO ? If so, why ? Who is out, where are runners placed? 
If this is not BOO, why ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0

 Ocean Blue. You have been given the correct ruling by several very knowledgeable posters, yet you refuse to believe them, maybe because it's not the answer you were looking for, or maybe because you're just trolling. The question has been answered. Give it up.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member
  • 0

This is from J/R (emphasis added):

The first pitch to any batter legalizes the preceding batter, whether or not
he had previously been proper. But even though the batter who is up may
be improper, he is not the one called out. It is the responsibility of the
proper batter to take his place at bat promptly in the correct sequence. So,
the proper batter is the one called out, and he has then completed his at
bat. The player listed in the next slot is then the proper batter unless that
player is on base after continuous action has ended. If this is the case, his
slot is then skipped and the player in the next slot is the proper batter.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

 "When several players bat out of order before discovery so that a player’s time at bat occurs while he is a runner, such player remains on base, but he is NOT out as a batter" note what I underlined above. Only one player BOO in the OP. So this statement, if I was talking Fed (which I wasn't) WOULD NOT apply.

Oh...by the way...several batters were skipped in you example. B2- B8. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest OceanBlue
1 hour ago, noumpere said:

This is from J/R (emphasis added):

The first pitch to any batter legalizes the preceding batter, whether or not
he had previously been proper. But even though the batter who is up may
be improper, he is not the one called out. It is the responsibility of the
proper batter to take his place at bat promptly in the correct sequence. So,
the proper batter is the one called out, and he has then completed his at
bat. The player listed in the next slot is then the proper batter unless that
player is on base after continuous action has ended. If this is the case, his
slot is then skipped and the player in the next slot is the proper batter.

Does J/R wording trump a MLBUM reference (where they conflict) ? I don't think so.

1 hour ago, Richvee said:

 "When several players bat out of order before discovery so that a player’s time at bat occurs while he is a runner, such player remains on base, but he is NOT out as a batter" note what I underlined above. Only one player BOO in the OP. So this statement, if I was talking Fed (which I wasn't) WOULD NOT apply.

Oh...by the way...several batters were skipped in you example. B2- B8. 

Interesting way to look at it (B2-B8 skipped) to make B9 the next batter. But none of those players in your way of looking at it (B2-B8 skipped) batted out of order. So I don't think your point is germane.

Besides my OP did not reference Fed (OBR intended) and I was referencing the MLBUM. For simplicity, lets stick to OBR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

The OBR ruling itself indicates "proper batter is on base" -- with no mention of whether he was originally an improper batter or not.  Had they wanted to, they could have worded it as "Because Daniel (or whever0 was originally  improper and is now  on base, he is skipped ..." and added a ruling for what to do if the next-batter was not originally improper.

So ,you can choose to read MLBUM as an example, and follow the general guidelines, or as a prescription / restriction and then need to make up other rules to get some result.

I choose the former.  You choose the latter.  <shrug>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest OceanBlue
3 hours ago, noumpere said:

The OBR ruling itself indicates "proper batter is on base" -- with no mention of whether he was originally an improper batter or not.  Had they wanted to, they could have worded it as "Because Daniel (or whever0 was originally  improper and is now  on base, he is skipped ..." and added a ruling for what to do if the next-batter was not originally improper.

First off, it was stated that Daniels was an improper batter

3 hours ago, noumpere said:

PLAY (6 )—Daniel walks and Abel comes to bat. Daniel was an improper batter ...

It just does not say that his prior BOO was the sole reason that he was skipped without penalty.  That could be an omission (the MLBUM is restricted as written) or intentionally omitted to include conditions that are outside of what was specified in the written interp.

I choose the former.  You choose the latter.  <shrug>

3 hours ago, noumpere said:

... and then need to make up other rules to get some result

You only need BOO rules (maybe abandonment rules) to successfully officiate this situation. No rule creativity is required.

I am not the one extending conditions to rules/interps that are specifically (although I admit possibly erroneously) not included. And I can't help but be amused by the juxtaposition of me wanting to go by the letter of the interp and you wanting to extend it beyond what's written.

Unfortunately, neither one wins this argument (10,000 internet umpire opinions notwithstanding ) without an official interp of that interp. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 5/15/2018 at 11:31 AM, Guest OceanBlue said:


If this official interp does not apply, is there another interp that does ? If not, then I think that this is BOO, and even though B1 can stay on 2B (no rule saying that he doesn't), his AB (after B9) is counted as an out. And B2 comes off of 1B and returns to bat.

I've only skimmed most of the posts, but the above in bold seems to be the focus of your argument.  In the absence of a specific case play or rule cite when the proper batter is on base without having batted out of order, then we are to apply what we have available.  The most reasonable approach would be to simply skip the next proper batter who is already on base.  After all, if the rules allow a batter to remain on base who got there by batting out of order (and later legitimized), then why in the world would the rules makers want that same proper batter, who did not previously bat out of order, to be called out for missing his turn at bat because he's already on base?  That would be absurd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Enough. Our guest wants validation, not the correct ruling. Wrong forum for pointless, endless bickering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

BAHAHAH, he wants abandonment during a dead ball situation!!!

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Had an interesting one with this last weekend in high school playoffs. I was announcing the game and neither team was mine. Third inning with two outs and a runner at second with a 3-1 count. On the pitch, called a ball, R2 attempts to steal third and is put away by the catcher. In the top of the 4th, the same batter returns to the plate and strikes out. I assume that, if the opposing team caught it, they were simply waiting to see if he gets on base before objecting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 5/15/2018 at 9:41 AM, Guest OceanBlue said:

In the middle of the game, B1 (proper B) leads off and gets a hit. B9 (improper B) makes an out. B2 comes to bat and gets a hit (B1 to 2B). Before the next pitched to B3, the defense appeal BOO (claiming that B2 batted in B1's spot). Because B9 became a proper batter (with a pitch to B2), B1 should be the next proper batter, but B1 is on 2B. 

Is this BOO ? If so, why ? Who is out, where are runners placed? 
If this is not BOO, why ? 

You said it yourself. Once there was a pitch to B2, B9 became a proper batter. Since B1 is on base, B2 is now the proper batter. No Boo. 

When you have such knowledgeable minds who on this thread have given you the right interpretation of this play (minds a lot more gifted than mine) and you doubt rather than inquire, you seem not wanting to learn, but wanting to be justified for something you may have gotten wrong. 

All I know is if I screw up a rule, I would want to learn to get it right next time. The people here have a wealth of knowledge to learn from, I treasure it as an umpire, hopefully you can too.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×