Jump to content

mrumpiresir

Established Member
  • Posts

    332
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mrumpiresir

  1. Even if I agree that it's a projected sub (which by the way I dont) where is the "penalty" for that or the instructions about what to do if you do inadvertantly allow one? As far as I recall, it just says "they are not allowed" not that they are illegal or a penalty for doing it. Projected subs just don't happen. As stated earlier, they are to be ignored. At the start of an inning when a coach says"18 will bat for 22 who's scheduled up third" I simply tell him to let me know when it actually happens. That's when I annotate my scorecard. Any thing he says before the sub actually enters is nothing. Based on what mstaylor says that FED says, you can take the sub offensively and the coach is locked in for that third at bat. Same as OBR and NCAA. If that's what they are saying, so be it. In 22 years of umpiring, as far as i know, this has always been a projected sub. Have my three umpire associations and I been wrong all those years???
  2. Even if I agree that it's a projected sub (which by the way I dont) where is the "penalty" for that or the instructions about what to do if you do inadvertantly allow one? As far as I recall, it just says "they are not allowed" not that they are illegal or a penalty for doing it. Projected subs just don't happen. As stated earlier, they are to be ignored. At the start of an inning when a coach says"18 will bat for 22 who's scheduled up third" I simply tell him to let me know when it actually happens. That's when I annotate my scorecard. Any thing he says before the sub actually enters is nothing.
  3. Tell him that according to the NFHS preseason guide this year, that subs made by the offense while they are on offense are not projected and that a legal sub was made. Then tell him the now legal batter is BOO and was properly fixed before the at bat was over. Sounds pretty clean to me. I have seen no preseason bulletin addressing this. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist, just that I haven't seen it. Could you post something that says that while on offense there can be no offensive projected subs?
  4. I gotta agree with Jocko. Just makes sense to me.
  5. JM, We are just going to have to agree to disagree on this issue................until something relevant surfaces from an authority.
  6. This thread has run it's course and we are not getting anywhere. It's time to retire to the bar and enjoy our favorite beverage as we discuss other things.
  7. Since we can't seem to find a rule that covers this particular situation, whatever the PU rules, whether it be JM's interpretation, or mine, would probably be correct. This may be one of the rare situations where rule 10.2.3G may apply. Should a coach decide to protest this ruling, what rule will he cite?
  8. He was reported in the 8 slot. He batted in the 7 slot. he was unreported in the 7 slot. The unreported sub is now batting for the player who was in the 7 slot.
  9. Referring back to the OP, the 7 batter went into the lineup after the sub was at bat because the offensive coach apparently realized the 7 spot was due up. Did the OC not realize who was due to lead off? I think that changes everything. Sounds to me like a projected sub especially if that sub is allowed to bat in the 8 hole. And if it is a projected sub, I see him as an unreported sub. BTW I believe your arguments have merit but I still feel in my gut that the original statement by the coach was a projection (which should be ignored) which makes the sub unreported in the 7 hole.
  10. Because he entered the game immediately doesn't change the fact that the 7 spot was due up but the coach is saying he wants him in the 8 spot. That is a projected sub.
  11. But in the OP it was. 7 batter due to bat but coach said he was subbing for the 8 batter. How is this not a projected sub?
  12. Your scenario is fundamentally different than that of the OP. You have BOO when the #8 batter enters the box and if the coach puts in the sub for him, he is also BOO because #7 batter was skipped. In the OP, the coach was making a projected substitution. Since this is not allowed, as far as I'm concerned, it never happened. Now the sub gets into the box, the ball is made live, and we have an unreported sub in the 7 spot. No spots are skipped and all is legal. It is going to be interesting to see who steps into the box next.
  13. Don't beat yourself about it. It appears you have learned. That's good
  14. Simply put; The coach made a projected sub. That is not allowed so disregard everything the coach said. When the sub bats, he is an unannounced sub batting in the 7 hole and is legal. Even if the umpire accepts the "projected sub", even unknowingly, he has done something contrary to what the rule states. So we don't have BOO at that point. The coach screwed up, not the umpire.
  15. Essentially the coach said he was substituting for the 8 hole but what he did was substitute for the 7 hole. Maybe when the coach said "number 18 is batting for number 22", the PU should ask if that spot in the lineup is due up now. That could have prevented a lot of trouble. In the OP, the PU did not know it was a projected sub because he was not aware of who was due to bat. Both the offensive and defensive coaches should have known who was due to bat.
  16. So the question, at least to me, is; which takes precedent? Is the sub in the lineup for B8 which is what the coach asked for, or is he now B7 because he entered in that spot (as an unreported sub would legally do)?
  17. OK. That makes sense. So the sub bats in the 7 hole and is followed by the 9 hole. If the defense is paying attention we should have an appeal for BOO during or after the 9 batter bats. If they don't appeal, the next time around when the 7 hole batter bats in that spot he would legally be replacing the sub that went into the 7 hole. When that sub now tries to bat in the 8 hole, we have an illegal sub at least and or BOO. Here is another opportunity for the defense to appeal.This is all based on the premise that no one noticed two guys in the 7 hole playing defense. What a mess. You won't have BOO the first time through. It's simply a pinch hitter. I agree we don't have BOO when the sub bats in the 7 hole, but if he's followed by the 9 hole batter then the 9 hole batter would be BOO.
  18. OK. That makes sense. So the sub bats in the 7 hole and is followed by the 9 hole. If the defense is paying attention we should have an appeal for BOO during or after the 9 batter bats. If they don't appeal, the next time around when the 7 hole batter bats in that spot he would legally be replacing the sub that went into the 7 hole. When that sub now tries to bat in the 8 hole, we have an illegal sub at least and or BOO. Here is another opportunity for the defense to appeal.This is all based on the premise that no one noticed two guys in the 7 hole playing defense. What a mess.
  19. Are you saying both the sub and the original batter in the 7 hole have been playing defense for two innings? If so, when the defense appeals you would have to fix it and invoke penalties according to the rules. It sound like a sticky situation but your line up card, if correct, is the proper batting order. As stated earlier, the responsibility is on the coach to monitor his line up. If it's wrong according to your line up card, then you may have BOO at the time the defense appeals.
  20. The sub the coach wanted in the 8 hole is actually in the 7 hole. The player who was in the 7 hole has been substituted for. Unless I am misreading your sitch, I only have the previous sub in the 7 hole. When the 7 hole comes up again either the sub bats or the batter who was substituted for bats (reentry) and the previous sub is done for the day.
  21. For all of you on the "projected subs are not allowed" the "new guy is the #7 batter, even though the coach reported him as the #8 batter" side of this question, how do you address the "couple of innings later" BOO appeal? Because, by that interpretation, what you have is two players who have been playing in the game for a couple of innings in the same spot in the batting order. The #7 spot is the proper batter because the #6 batter batted last and was proper. What is your ruling when the defense appeals BOOT? JM Where is the BOO? If the unreported sub is in the 7 hole and the 9 hole bats after that but no appeal is made the 9 hole batter is made legal. Two innings later if they follow the proper order, then I don't see BOO.
×
×
  • Create New...