Player listed twice in the lineup

[midmoump]

Here is a rules conundrum to ponder whilst we wait for the grass to green. . .

Late in the 1988 season, the Milwaukee Brewers hosted the Detroit Tigers. The official lineup card listed future Hall of Famer Robin Yount batting third playing centerfield, and batting fifth as the DH.

In the TOP of the first Yount took his position in centerfield.

In the bottom of the first Yount batted third and lined out to second base.

In the bottom of the second Mike Young batted in the five spot and lined out to shortstop.

After Young lined out, Tigers manager Sparky Anderson complained. The umpire crew removed Yount from the game on the theory that Young had pinch hit for Yount in the five hole. A new outfielder took Yount’s position batting third and Young remained in the DH spot batting fifth (and the pitcher remained in the game).

Is that correct? What should have happened?

Pete

[Rich Ives]

The umpires should have noticed it at the plate meeting and had it fixed - if the rules were the same then.

I think I'd be inclined to rule that the first listed appearance was the correct one, thus Young batted for no one and was now in the 5 hole.

[johnnyg08]

I would tend to lean in that direction as well. Gotta look those lineup cards over!!

[midmoump]

The umpire crew of Dale Ford, Mike Reilly, John Shulock, and Mark Johnson made the initial ruling.

Two days later umpire Dave Phillips told The Milwaukee Journal that he and his crew (Dave Phillips, Larry Young, Steve Palermo, and Dan Morrison) consulted the rulebook and decided that the initial ruling was incorrect. Phillips explained his rationale to The Journal:

“You can't have the designated hitter in the lineup unless you so designate before the game,†said Phillips. “They designated Yount as the designated hitter. They also designated him as the center fielder.â€

“If Yount is the designated hitter before the game, he actually batted out of order the first time.â€

“Young was an unannounced substitute for Yount [in the second inning]. In reality, he wasn't in the lineup. He pinch hit for Yount.â€

Phillips and his crew decided that Yount still should have had to leave the game and Wegman should have been placed in the batting order in the third spot.

“When Yount went out to center field, they lose the DH,†said Phillips. “A designated hitter, when he goes out onto the field, he can no longer be a designated hitter.â€

Do you agree with this?

Pete (with a sly smile)

[mstaylor]

Sounds like they smoked that call. How can they figure that he was subbed for when he has already battted in another position? The simplist fix would just change the line-up but I don't know that is the correct thing to do. This is perhaps a true 9.01c moment, the problem is both managers screwed up, as well as the PU.

This was my answer last night but didn't finish it. If Young was the DH, didn't know the name, was unannounced before the game then the pitcher should have batted in the five hole because there was no DH.

[midmoump]

The plot thickens. . .

Marty Springstead, at the AL office, disagreed with the Phillips crew position. He stated that Yount should have remained in the game [in the three hole] and pitcher Wegman should have been placed into the fifth slot.

Here is the news story from The Milwaukee journal:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1499&dat=19880830&id=g-AjAAAAIBAJ&sjid=5CoEAAAAIBAJ&pg=3086,6940076

If it helps, here is a link to the box score:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/MIL/MIL198808280.shtml

Pete

[Rich Ives]

The plot thickens. . .

Marty Springstead, at the AL office, disagreed with the Phillips crew position. He stated that Yount should have remained in the game [in the three hole] and pitcher Wegman should have been placed into the fifth slot.

Here is the news story from The Milwaukee journal:

http://news.google.c...pg=3086,6940076

If it helps, here is a link to the box score:

http://www.baseball-...198808280.shtml

Pete

I'll buy this one. Yount entered the game on defense thus the DH went away so the pitcher bats in the DH slot.

[mstaylor]

The plot thickens. . .

Marty Springstead, at the AL office, disagreed with the Phillips crew position. He stated that Yount should have remained in the game [in the three hole] and pitcher Wegman should have been placed into the fifth slot.

Here is the news story from The Milwaukee journal:

http://news.google.c...pg=3086,6940076

If it helps, here is a link to the box score:

http://www.baseball-...198808280.shtml

Pete

I'll buy this one. Yount entered the game on defense thus the DH went away so the pitcher bats in the DH slot.

If they are going to say Yount was the DH and entered the game then the pitcher bats in the missing fielder's spot, not the DH. Technically since they didn't declare a DH there isn't one so the batter in the second is now a sub for the pitcher, he is removed and the sub is now in his spot. Better get somebody throwing.

[midmoump]

I count four different approaches to this problem by highly respected baseball minds:

The Ford Approach

I have no idea what the umpire crew was thinking and cannot support their actions with the rulebook. Perhaps they were trying to be fair and applied 9.03©.

The Phillips Approach

Phillips presumes that designating the DH takes precedence in creating the lineup. Because Yount was listed as the DH, he must be the DH and hit in the five spot. Rule 4.01© states that the lineup card shall designate which hitter is to be used as the DH, and the other player positions are listed as a courtesy. That suggests that the player designated as the DH takes precedence over all other positions listed in the lineup, so Yount is the DH and bats fifth. When he took the field in the first inning, the DH was eliminated and the pitcher must be inserted into the three spot.

Additional support for Phillips can be found in Rule 6.10, which discusses designating one player, other than the pitcher, to serve as DH. In this case only 9 players are listed on the lineup card, and one is listed as the DH and also the centerfielder. When a player is listed twice, obviously one player has been mistakenly omitted, but a designated DH is locked in under the Phillips approach. Nine players must take the field, but the DH does not play the field. [Rule 4.17]. Under the Phillips approach, Young could have gone to centerfield in the first and the Brewers would not have lost their DH (Yount).

The Springstead Approach

The BRD cites an official PBUC interpretation from Mike Fitzpatrick on page 311 of the 28th edition. Fitzpatrick says that if a player is listed twice on the lineup card, the first time the player bats locks him into that position in the batting order. This seems to support the argument that when Yount batted in the first, he was locked into that position. The lineup error eliminated the DH for the game, so when Young batted in the second he was an unannounced pinch hitter for the pitcher in the fifth spot. Fitzpatrick and Springstead seem to agree.

Don Denkinger applied this "error eliminates the DH" approach during a game in 1976. When Tigers manager Ralph Houk incorrectly listed two players as DH in the lineup, Denkingers eliminated the DH for the game.

A different interpretation of Rule 6.10 also supports the Springstead approach. While Milwaukee filled ten slots on the lineup card, only nine players are listed. Therefore, the game starts with only nine players, meaning centerfielder Yount is in the three hole and pitcher Wegman is in the fifth spot.

J/R Approach

J/R calls this situation a “self-correcting error.†Yount obviously cannot assume both spots in the lineup. When Yount played centerfield, he must be the centerfielder and another (Young) player must be the DH. In other words, “no harm, no foul.â€

So which one is correct?

Pete

(maybe this thread should be called Umpiring 601: Introduction to Theoretical umpiring)

[mstaylor]

I guess I tend toward the Springstead approach. There has to be a penaty because a pro manager has to be smarter than that. If you say he has to be in the five hole, what do you do with his AB in the first?

[midmoump]

MST,

Phillips said that Yount was properly the DH and batting in the fifth position. When Yount batted in the first, he batted out of order according to Phillips

Pete

[yawetag]

The plot thickens. . .

Marty Springstead, at the AL office, disagreed with the Phillips crew position. He stated that Yount should have remained in the game [in the three hole] and pitcher Wegman should have been placed into the fifth slot.

Here is the news story from The Milwaukee journal:

http://news.google.c...pg=3086,6940076

If it helps, here is a link to the box score:

http://www.baseball-...198808280.shtml

Pete

My first thought was the DH was removed when Yount entered the field (and batted third). At that point, F1 was the batter in the 5-hole. When Young came to bat in the 5-hole, he's now a pinch-hitter for F1. We're gonna need a new pitcher.

Edit: And now I see that's the Springstead approach. I misread the post above as "the pitcher remained in the fifth spot after the PH."

[sdix00]

The Springstead approach was my very first thought as I read the OP.

I would buy the J/R approach, as I like the concept of the self-correcting error, except that it allows the DH to be used after this screwup. No way do I allow a DH in this game. The DH was improperly listed.

[midmoump]

This is a very confusing situation! Is there a clear answer?

The OBR tells us what to do when a manager lists 10 players, but fails to designate a DH:

* If discovered before the game starts, it is an "obvious" error that can be corrected. Rule 6.10( B)(1).

* If discovered after the game starts, the DH is terminated for the game. Rule 6.11( B)(11)

For instance, the Tampa Bay Rays listed two third basemen during a home game against Cleveland in 2009. One player (Evan Longoria) was intended to be the DH. In the TOP half of the first, Ben Zobrist played third. In the bottom of the first, the Cleveland skipper pointed out the error. Since Zobrist had entered the game, he is locked into his lineup spot. The DH is terminated for the remainder of the game and the pitcher must bat in Longoria's vacated spot. However, since Longoria never entered the game, he has not been replaced and is still eligible to play.

http://mlb.mlb.com/n...tent_id=4783714

HOWEVER, the rules are silent as to what happens when a player is listed twice - once as the DH.

Steve, I like the J/R approach also, but how do you support it? 9.03©?

Was the DH improperly listed? Phillips would argue that the DH was properly designated. I assume Springstead would say that because only nine players are listed, or because they screwed up the lineup card with the DH, there can be no DH. But where is that rule found?

Pete

EDIT: that should be 6.10(B)(11)

[UmpTTS43]

Thought about it for a bit. I'm with the Philips approach and I believe it is more in line with the rules and the most reasonable. I understand the Springstead philosophy and could abide by that. The J/R interp is just plain silly.

Bottom line, check your lineup cards.

[mstaylor]

If he hadn't batted at all when it was caught, then I can see just fixing it. Once he bats in the three hole, that takes precedence period. Once the intended DH,Young, took his spot in the box then you are stuck with one of two things. Decide to make him the DH, no rule support, or call him an unannounced sub, get me a new pitcher.

I just don't see any other viable answer without completely 9.01Cing it. No matter it is going to involve a very long discussion in the middle of the field to sort through the options. Then no matter what you do assume there will an ensuing protest.

[midmoump]

There was no protest by either side and the Brewers won the game 12-10. A protest would have been the smart thing to do by both sides, although I can understand Sparky Anderson not wanting to further rock the boat once his goal of removing Yount from the game was met. The funny thing is that his replacement, Jim Adduci, had a big game. Adduci went two for three including a double, a sacrifice fly, 2 rbi and 2 rs.

It's too bad there wasn't a protest because then we would have a definitive answer. As it is, I would enforce the Springstead approach because I have two authoritative opinions (Fitzpatrick and Springstead): Yount bats third and plays centerfield. "The error eliminates the DH" and Wegman bats in the five hole. When Young hits in the second, he is an unannounced pinch hitter for Wegman. Get someone throwing, skip.

The Phillips approach makes some sense and has better rule support, but as MST says it falls apart when Yount batted in the three hole. Now Phillips has to create a fiction for his interpretation to work - that Yount batted out of turn and Young pinch hit for him.

Pete

[UmpTTS43]

If he hadn't batted at all when it was caught, then I can see just fixing it. Once he bats in the three hole, that takes precedence period. Once the intended DH,Young, took his spot in the box then you are stuck with one of two things. Decide to make him the DH, no rule support, or call him an unannounced sub, get me a new pitcher.

I just don't see any other viable answer without completely 9.01Cing it. No matter it is going to involve a very long discussion in the middle of the field to sort through the options. Then no matter what you do assume there will an ensuing protest.

I don't believe just batting in the three spot takes precedence. I believe, as Phillips may have, that the batter listed as the DH takes precedence. There are specific rules concerning the DH including where it says that the batter listed as the DH must complete one turn at bat with the exceptions, none of them being line-up error. If Young were to be inserted into that spot, that would have violated the rule. With Yount batting, the rule requirement was met and it turns into a BOO. By taking into consideration that the batter listed as the DH takes precedence, all of the other subs, line-up changes fall into place by using the rules ascribed to the DH. It boils down to what the official authority determines as to what takes precedence, the player listed as DH or when he first makes his appearance at the plate. In the former, you can use 9.01c to determine precedence and use the rules to figure the rest out. In the latter, you have to use 9.01c throughout the entire process, possibly ignoring/disregarding established rules.

[midmoump]

I don't believe just batting in the three spot takes precedence. I believe, as Phillips may have, that the batter listed as the DH takes precedence. There are specific rules concerning the DH including where it says that the batter listed as the DH must complete one turn at bat with the exceptions, none of them being line-up error. If Young were to be inserted into that spot, that would have violated the rule. With Yount batting, the rule requirement was met and it turns into a BOO. By taking into consideration that the batter listed as the DH takes precedence, all of the other subs, line-up changes fall into place by using the rules ascribed to the DH. It boils down to what the official authority determines as to what takes precedence, the player listed as DH or when he first makes his appearance at the plate. In the former, you can use 9.01c to determine precedence and use the rules to figure the rest out. In the latter, you have to use 9.01c throughout the entire process, possibly ignoring/disregarding established rules.

That is a very good point! The rulebook says that if a DH is not designated and the game begins, there is no DH. On the other hand, if a DH is designated, he must bat once.

But look at what actually happened in this game:

1. An obvious error has been made on the lineup card that should have been corrected by the umpires: Youn(t) hitting third playing CF, Youn(g) hitting fifth as DH

2. When the first pitch is thrown, Yount is in centerfield.

3. Yount bats in the third spot and does not bat in the fifth spot.

4. Young bats fifth.

In order for the Phillips approach to work, you have to reinterpret the game. The Phillips approach defies Ockhman's Razor and creates several fictions to describe what happened, including:

1. Yount is locked into the DH position batting fifth due to the lineup card error. Rule 4.01, Rule 6.10

2. When Yount took the field in the TOP of the first, the DH position was eliminated. Rule 6.10(B)(5)

3. When Yount batted in the first inning in the three hole, he was batting out of order. Rule 6.10(B)(5)

4. When Young batted in the second inning in the five hole, he was an unannounced pinch hitter for Yount. Rule 6.10(B)(4)

The umpire is both an eye-witness to the events of the game and an arbiter. The umpire witnesses, describes, and rules on the events of the game. Instead of applying the rules to the actual events of the game, the Phillips approach creates a fictional account of the game in order to apply rules.

On the other hand, the Springstead approach describes the events as they actually happened, but punishes the error by eliminating the DH. The Springstead approach creates a penalty to apply to what actually happened.

Which is worse? I dunno. I prefer the Springstead approach.

[UmpTTS43]

I understand most of what you say except for the part about creating a fictional account of the game. I can't seem to wrap my skull around the meaning of that. My initial thought process had Yount batting prior to taking the field. With him taking the field prior to batting I can see where the Springstead philosophy comes in. Quite a conundrum. Interesting discussion. Appreciate the debate.

[midmoump]

I absolutely respect the Phillips approach. Some umpires might say that the "rules are all we have." Maybe that's right.

What I'm trying to say is that Phillips is using the rules to interpret the events of the game. Did Yount actually bat out of order? Was Young actually a pinch hitter. I don't believe anyone in the ballpark thought so and likely believed Yount was in CF batting third and Young was the DH batting fifth. The scoreboard probably said as much. A mistake was made on the lineup card, that is the problem.

The Phillips approach says that the rules cause Yount to bat fifth as the DH.

BUT. . .

* No centerfielder was designated to start the game

* When the first pitch was thrown, Yount was in CF.

* SO who did Yount replace in CF?

* And Rule 6.10( B)(5) says the pitcher must bat in the place of the substituted defensive player. Who's that? Yount?

Who's on first? What? Second base! The Phillips approach fictionalizes the events of the game.

[TNCoach]

I will have to ask Dale about that one the next time I see him...