2014 Rules Test

[UmpTTS43]

I have a hard time assuming a double play when the INT is not intentional. That is why OBR allows you to get two only when the INT is "willful and deliberate". From that you can judge the INT was meant to take away a double play opportunity.

That being said, if they want me to get two, I'll get two and submit my report.

 

I thought the same thing.  You're going to be writing a report after this one if you get two outs.  I can see if the B/R tackles F3 on purpose to keep him from catching and throwing the ball to third base to retire F3, but just garden variety interference?  I don't buy it.

 

The defensive team is using a nine-player lineup. The defensive team does not list a P/DH on their lineup. During a mound conference, the head coach wants S1 to replace F1 and S2 to replace F9 but have them swap positions in the batting order.

 

• a.
• The head coach may not make such a substitution.

• b.
• The head coach must inform the plate umpire before signaling for S2.

• c.
• The head coach must inform the plate umpire before leaving the field.

• d.
• The head coach must inform the umpire of his intention before crossing the foul line on the way to the mound

They are using a 9-player lineup and don't list a P/DH, so the pitcher is automatically the DH also. I am thinking C. The subs aren't replacing defensive positions, they're replacing spots in the order, so S2 would take the P/DH's spot in the order, while S1 would take F9's spot.

This one is C. This is a double switch and the PU must be informed immediately, prior to any change or visit to the mound. If the sub for the pitcher was to stay in that batting position, he can become the new P/DH or the removed pitcher can remain the DH. Once the coach wants to change the batting order it is a double switch and the DH is terminated.

 

We'll see when the results come out.  I'm pretty sure it's C.  

 

Edit: I looked at the rule book again and I don't really know.  Nevermind.

5-5-e states "if two or more substitute players of the defensive team enter the game simultaneously, the coach or a representative immediately shall designate to the umpire-in-chief the position of each in the team's batting order. If this is not done immediately, the umpire shall place them in the batting order."

This typically means that you record the change as straight changes, ie new pitcher bats in old pitcher position and new fielder bats in that replaced fielder's spot.

Concerning INT, it has to be intentional by a runner to get two (8-5-d). If the batter-runner interferes intentionally or not, with a double play likely, you get the batter-runner and the player closest to home (8-5-e). I disagree with the batter-runner, but like I said, I will enforce as wanted.

[cookie]

This question sent me into a whirlwind of thinking (obviously something you don't have time for on the field). I think this question is insufficiently worded.  I read this question to mean that S2 was going to replace F9 in the field yet bat in in the DH spot, and S1 was going to be the pitcher and bat in F9's spot. Obviously, you can't have a defensive player batting in the DH spot and playing a defensive position unless you terminate the DH. Since terminating the DH wasn't mentioned in the question, the question remained ambiguous to me. So I answered A -  can't make that substitution.  However, it could be C if the HC announced to the plate umpire hat he was going to terminate his DH. Then it would be a "double switch." (Note: I probably misread  the question.)

[cookie]

The "Study Guide" (p. 119 - Warm-ups) states "The penalty is calling a ball for each excess pitch (9-2i)." I realize that 9-2i speaks more toward the 90 second rule, but..... I chose A.

[cookie]

I answered C. This is the one instance where CI is an immediate dead ball, not delayed. The batter is awarded 1st base on the CI, and R3 and R2 are awarded their next base because of the Balk (8-1e Exception) 

[cookie]

I have A. I know that OBR requires willful interference (intentional) to get 2 outs out of this situation. I believe NCAA follows the same rule.

[alex7]

I answered C. This is the one instance where CI is an immediate dead ball, not delayed. The batter is awarded 1st base on the CI, and R3 and R2 are awarded their next base because of the Balk (8-1e Exception) 

 

which ? are you referring to?

[cookie]

Sorry men for the ambiguity about my posts. I thought this thread started at 1:58 pm this afternoon, so I wrote replies to each one as I read them thinking that I was including the quote of each one of them with my reply. But alas, as I read through the rest of the posts by others replying to the OP's, I see that the quotes of the OP's were not included in my replies. However, after reading posts of others, I gained a better understanding situations presented here. Sorry again for the foul-up.

[cookie]

Sorry, Alex, for failing to quote the situation you presented (I thought I did). My post referred to you post 12:48 pm today:  "Question 6. R2, R3, squeeze play..."

 

PS Note: I see the quote mechanism isn't working for me or I don't know how to engage it...

[UmpTTS43]

 

PS Note: I see the quote mechanism isn't working for me or I don't know how to engage it...

Down a large swig of bourbon, take a deep breath, approach it and say "Mind if I push your button!"

[alex7]

Sorry, Alex, for failing to quote the situation you presented (I thought I did). My post referred to you post 12:48 pm today:  "Question 6. R2, R3, squeeze play..."

 

PS Note: I see the quote mechanism isn't working for me or I don't know how to engage it...

 

Sorry, Alex, for failing to quote the situation you presented (I thought I did). My post referred to you post 12:48 pm today:  "Question 6. R2, R3, squeeze play..."

 

PS Note: I see the quote mechanism isn't working for me or I don't know how to engage it...

 

Excellent, I see it now.  I had read the AR but not the exception.  CI is only different on a squeeze play, where it induces a balk call.

[Haid D' Salaami]

 

 

R2, R3, no outs. B3 bunts the ball in the air along the first base line with the runners moving on contact. As the first baseman moves in to make the catch, he collides with B3, who was not trying to interfere.

 

• a.
  • Dead ball, interference on B3. Since the interference was not intentional, only B3 is called out. All other runners return to their previous base.

 

• b.
  • Dead ball, interference on B3. Both B3 and R3 are out. R2 returns to second base.

 

• c.
  • Dead ball; interference on B3. B3 is out and so is R2 for the interference of his teammate. R3 returns to third.

 

• d.
  • No interference. The batter did not intentionally interfere. This is an example of the "scramble/unscramble" play.

 

 

I already know the correct answer to this one. (It's not necessarily the one that is highlighted above)

 

What do you guys have?

 

Be out and R3.. INt before BR reaches 1st.

[johnnyg08]

Be out and R3.. INt before BR reaches 1st.

this^^^^

[Dean]

I know we have a discussion going on in the Rules section of the board about another test question, but I wanted to post a few more questions that I had trouble with and see what you guys have.  I don't want answers, but if anyone has rule citations or can jog my memory on any of these, go for it.  I will post them in separate posts to keep them organized.  Just quote that post when answering...

 

 

The batting order is Able, Baker, Charles, Daniels. Charles bats instead of Baker and singles to center field. Baker comes to bat and singles sending Charles to third base. The defense appeals that Baker batted out of turn.

 

• a.
  • Daniels is declared out and Charles is returned to first.

 

• b.
  • Baker and Daniels are both declared out and Charles is returned to first.

 

• c.
  • Baker is declared out and Charles is the next batter.

 

• d.
  • Baker is declared out and Charles is returned to first

 

If the defense had appealed the BOO after Charles completed his turn at bat, the proper batter (Baker) would have been called out and Charles would be the next batter.  The appeal doesn't come until after Baker bats though, so was Daniels supposed to be the proper batter and Baker batted in his place, so Daniels would be out?  

I believe,  Dainels is declared out and Charles is returned to first.

[Dean]

 

 

 

 

R2, R3, no outs. B3 bunts the ball in the air along the first base line with the runners moving on contact. As the first baseman moves in to make the catch, he collides with B3, who was not trying to interfere.

 

• a.
  • Dead ball, interference on B3. Since the interference was not intentional, only B3 is called out. All other runners return to their previous base.

 

• b.
  • Dead ball, interference on B3. Both B3 and R3 are out. R2 returns to second base.

 

• c.
  • Dead ball; interference on B3. B3 is out and so is R2 for the interference of his teammate. R3 returns to third.

 

• d.
  • No interference. The batter did not intentionally interfere. This is an example of the "scramble/unscramble" play.

 

 

I already know the correct answer to this one. (It's not necessarily the one that is highlighted above)

 

What do you guys have?

 

I put "B", using 8-5-e.  Visualizing the play, I'm thinking runners moving on contact means R3 & R2 unlikely to be able to get back to the base before F3 would be able to double them off, absent the interference.  Granted -- depending on how fast R3 puts on the brakes, may be able to make it back, so this is a little gray for me.  Rule says intent if immaterial, so I think that makes "A" and "D" incorrect.  And if I use 8-5-e, it's the BR and the runner closest to home...so that makes "C" incorrect.  Not a black and white play, but my best take via process of elimination...

 

Looks like good logic to me.

 

Since the interference was not intentional, I think the rule refrence is 8-5-d.

[Forest Ump]

8-5-d only applies to a runner interfering.  Go with 8-5-e for a batted runner interfering.

[Dean]

Thanks Forest because d & e seemed to contradict each other - that explains it.

[johnnyg08]

Baker is the proper batter and Charles bats instead and doubles.  Baker then singles and advances Charles to third.  Daniels is batting with a 2-1 count when the defensive coach appeals batting out of order.  

 

A.  Do nothing.  Daniels is the proper batter.

 

B.  Call out Daniels and bring Edwards to bat.

 

C.  Call Charles out and leave Baker at first.  Daniels remains at bat with a 2-1 count.

 

D.  Because the coach appealed during the at bat of Daniels and before the next proper batter is legalized, bring Edwards to bat without penalty.  Edwards will assume the 2-1 count.

[JaxRolo]

Baker is the proper batter and Charles bats instead and doubles. Baker then singles and advances Charles to third. Daniels is batting with a 2-1 count when the defensive coach appeals batting out of order.

A. Do nothing. Daniels is the proper batter.

B. Call out Daniels and bring Edwards to bat.

C. Call Charles out and leave Baker at first. Daniels remains at bat with a 2-1 count.

D. Because the coach appealed during the at bat of Daniels and before the next proper batter is legalized, bring Edwards to bat without penalty. Edwards will assume the 2-1 count.

This a trick question?

A.

[Richvee]

Baker is the proper batter and Charles bats instead and doubles.  Baker then singles and advances Charles to third.  Daniels is batting with a 2-1 count when the defensive coach appeals batting out of order.  

 

A.  Do nothing.  Daniels is the proper batter.

 

B.  Call out Daniels and bring Edwards to bat.

 

C.  Call Charles out and leave Baker at first.  Daniels remains at bat with a 2-1 count.

 

D.  Because the coach appealed during the at bat of Daniels and before the next proper batter is legalized, bring Edwards to bat without penalty.  Edwards will assume the 2-1 count.

This is interesting. Charles doubles. Once a pitch is thrown to Baker, it legalized Charles AB, and Daniels was the proper batter. However, Baker batted, and there was no appeal of Baker BOO. So, once a pitch is thrown to Daniels, Baker's AB is legalized, and Charles is the proper batter (he follows Baker in the batting order) However, Charles is on base, so, according to play 6 of rule 6.7,

When the proper batter is on base, he is passed over, and the following batter becomes the proper batter.

 

Daniels is indeed the proper batter. BOO appeal is denied. Play continues with Daniels up and a 2-1 count.