When does the on-deck batter become the batter?

[Rich Ives]

When is the transition point between the "current" batter completing his AB and the on-deck batter becomming the batter?

Cites from an official source or authoratative source for bonus points.

You-know-who: Can we stand aside a bit and see what shows up?

[1dumbquestion]

Before even clicking on this thread I thought what is Rich Ives doing ASKING a question, but now I see why. Well, my first instinct was when the previous batter becomes a runner or finishes his time at bat. But then I had some doubts. I haven't thumbed through my manuals yet but I'm going to go with when he positions himself in the batters box (assuming there isn't another batter already there). I will happily be corrected as now I'm a bit curious myself. 1

[grayhawk]

All from 2011 BRD. Page 52.

Fed (2-7-1): The batter is the player of the offensive team who is "entitled to occupy either of the two batter's boxes."

NCAA (9-4a AR 3): A player on-deck is a "batter" when the previous batter is put our or reaches a base: "The new batter does not have to enter the batter's box to be considered a batter."

OBR (2.00 Batter): The batter is "an offensive player who takes his position in the batter's box."

So in Fed and NCAA, as soon as the previous batter is put out or reaches a base, the next player in the batting order is officially the batter. In OBR, he has to take his position in the batter's box to be officially considered as the batter.

[umpire23]

A batter becomes a batter as soon as he steps into the batter's box with or without play commencing.

[mstaylor]

The next person in the batting order is the batter as soon as the previous batter completes his AB. The difference is in 60ft LL the next batter should not be out of the dugout until play has finished. In systems where there is an actual on deck batter then he is authorized to be out there, can go behind the plate and be a base coach, clear the bat, all that happy stuff.

[Rich Ives]

The next person in the batting order is the batter as soon as the previous batter completes his AB. The difference is in 60ft LL the next batter should not be out of the dugout until play has finished. In systems where there is an actual on deck batter then he is authorized to be out there, can go behind the plate and be a base coach, clear the bat, all that happy stuff.

AHA!

Maybe he SHOULD not be out there. But you now agree he's the batter? If so then he's not an on-deck batter which is the positon that is illegal. But because he is the batter he's authorized to be out there.

[Rich Ives]

A batter becomes a batter as soon as he steps into the batter's box with or without play commencing.

What if he refuses to initially step into the box? Can you call a directed strike? You can only do that on a batter.

[mstaylor]

I don't disagree that he isn't the next batter, I just disagree that he belongs out of the dugout when they are throwing the ball around. If it is a walk, then it is relaxed play and he can come out. We will continue to disagree but I stand firm. :)

[Rich Ives]

I don't disagree that he isn't the next batter, I just disagree that he belongs out of the dugout when they are throwing the ball around. If it is a walk, then it is relaxed play and he can come out. We will continue to disagree but I stand firm.

I already said it's stupid. It's just that there's nothing that makes it illegal. :)

[NFUA_44]

OK, it's stupid. But to take the thread onwards and upwards, what are the situations where his designation cause the greatest conflict? Is it a late developing INT play at the plate that he stumbles into, or some other third world type of sitch we're looking at?

I'm sure Rich has something in mind, and it's always good!

[Rich Ives]

OK, it's stupid. But to take the thread onwards and upwards, what are the situations where his designation cause the greatest conflict? Is it a late developing INT play at the plate that he stumbles into, or some other third world type of sitch we're looking at?

I'm sure Rich has something in mind, and it's always good!

How you rule depends on whether or not he's authorized to be on the field and a throw hits him.

If not: it's interference.

If he is: the interference must be intentionnal.

[mstaylor]

There was a thread on another board about a batter coming out of the dugout while they still had live runners and got hit by a thrown ball. I say he has no business out of the dugout in LL 60ft, Rich says he is now the batter and allowed out so he has to intentionally interfere. If it's 90ft then certainly the on deck batter is allowed on the field. I feel on 60ft he is not.

[NFUA_44]

So the real crux of this issue boils down to whether a specific rule set allows for the ODB or not. Interesting. From that point it's a matter of judgment if there was a possible INT call.

Of course this could get to be a real fun one to explain to a coach as his team moves from 60 foot base paths to longer ones, i.e. 70, 80, or 90, where that ODB is allowed. That's the beauty of kickin it around on this forum, and the other one, always good viewpoints to consider.

[Rich Ives]

So the real crux of this issue boils down to whether a specific rule set allows for the ODB or not. Interesting.

Nope - even if not allowed, the crux is when the "next batter" becomes "the batter" and thus not the "on deck batter".

[mstaylor]

I bet on any given LL field I could sell my call and you could sell yours. both arguments have merit and we both are old enough with a strong enough rules rep that we could sell it.

[Rich Ives]

I bet on any given LL field I could sell my call and you could sell yours. both arguments have merit and we both are old enough with a strong enough rules rep that we could sell it.

I'll buy that