Ejected batter--what next?

[Recontra]

Count is 1-2 with one out. Batter gets yarded for drawing a line in the dirt (or any other reason). Does next batter come up with one out and a clean count, or is the offense required to substitute for the ejected player, and the substitute enters and assumes the count? If it's substitution, what if none are available? Record an out?

[WIUMP]

Next batter (the substitute, not next in the order) assumes the count. Substitution rules apply.

 

Edit: clarity

Edited February 24, 2015 by Matthew Turner

[Recontra]

Thanks.

[FleasOf1000Camels]

If the team at bat has a legal sub available, he would assume the ejected player's at-bat and count.

If no legal sub is available, that spot would be an out...and would also have to be an out in any future at-bats for that vacated slot in the order.

 

FWIW; Unless there had been prior similar issues, I'd suggest finding some less severe method to deal with these sort of demonstrations. 

[VAUmp]

If he's ejected after the second strike, he must be replaced with an eligible substitute and the substitute inherits the 1-2 count.

I disagree Fleas .. If a player draws a line, AUTOMATIC EJECTION!!!  100% of the time

[MidAmUmp]

FWIW; Unless there had been prior similar issues, I'd suggest finding some less severe method to deal with these sort of demonstrations. 

Unless you want to get walked on the rest of the game, Eject.

 

The only time I didn't eject for drawing a line is a kid did it very slowly and I told him if the bat came off the ground before he got back to the dugout he was gone. He drug it all the way into the dugout.

[conbo61]

If he's ejected after the second strike, he must be replaced with an eligible substitute and the substitute inherits the 1-2 count.

I disagree Fleas .. If a player draws a line, AUTOMATIC EJECTION!!! 100% of the time

Here we go again...

[Recontra]

Yep.  Sorry, my bad.  Should have "anticipated all play possibilities but not their outcomes . . ."  "Batter gets yarded for any reason (good, bad, horseSH*#, unnecessary, necessary, lame, technically correct but OO, etc.) . . .?"

 

I heard a great story from a former PAC 10 (now PAC 12) retired umpire.  High level NCAA game, he calls a strike on an outsidish pitch.  Batter draws a line in the dirt.  Umpire ignores the batter.  Next pitch comes in way the hell outside and high.  "Strike!!"  "Let's see you draw a line on that."

[maven]

I heard a great story from a former PAC 10 (now PAC 12) retired umpire.  High level NCAA game, he calls a strike on an outsidish pitch.  Batter draws a line in the dirt.  Umpire ignores the batter.  Next pitch comes in way the hell outside and high.  "Strike!!"  "Let's see you draw a line on that."

 

Note to umpires working below NCAA: in case you've never heard of it, this is an example of a "F you!" call (FYC). Such calls may be used under certain circumstances at higher levels with players who shave, provided the supervisor supports their use at that level.

 

FYC's are almost universally improper at lower levels, especially in youth ball where everyone there is trying to learn the game. As tempting as they might be, especially given the behavior of some coaches, they are not recommended. Make your calls properly, and take out the trash using the tools appropriate to that level.

[MidAmUmp]

 

I heard a great story from a former PAC 10 (now PAC 12) retired umpire.  High level NCAA game, he calls a strike on an outsidish pitch.  Batter draws a line in the dirt.  Umpire ignores the batter.  Next pitch comes in way the hell outside and high.  "Strike!!"  "Let's see you draw a line on that."

 

Note to umpires working below NCAA: in case you've never heard of it, this is an example of a "F you!" call (FYC). Such calls may be used under certain circumstances at higher levels with players who shave, provided the supervisor supports their use at that level.

 

FYC's are almost universally improper at lower levels, especially in youth ball where everyone there is trying to learn the game. As tempting as they might be, especially given the behavior of some coaches, they are not recommended. Make your calls properly, and take out the trash using the tools appropriate to that level.

 

Don't even do it at the NCAA level. Even if the game isn't being broadcast on the internet (most are these days), every at bat is videotaped for review. I guarantee you that if you do that now you'll be getting a phone call from your supervisor within an hour of the end of the game.

[Recontra]

I concur. I almost added to the story that it was obvious to me that was something only a very senior and established and respected umpire in a higher league could get away with.  Joe West could probably get away with that, and probably even shout "Let's see you draw a line on that!" so it's heard in the nose bleed seats.  First time AAA guy called up to cover a game?  Maybe not.  I get it.  Still cracked me up.  Also, it's an example of a very senior umpire not automatically tossing a batter for drawing a line in the dirt.

[MidAmUmp]

About 10 years ago...that was standard procedure. Kick the catcher, get him to set up WAY outside, stick the pitch, Steeeeeee-rike 3. Shove it up a kids ass all the live long day. But now with TV, Internet broadcasts, videotaped at-bats, and kinder, gentler, more approachable umpires... ...not anymore. You'll be looking for a new hobby.

[JaxRolo]

If the team at bat has a legal sub available, he would assume the ejected player's at-bat and count.

If no legal sub is available, that spot would be an out...and would also have to be an out in any future at-bats for that vacated slot in the order.

 

FWIW; Unless there had been prior similar issues, I'd suggest finding some less severe method to deal with these sort of demonstrations. 

There is only ONE way to deal with this.

[johnnyg08]

If the team at bat has a legal sub available, he would assume the ejected player's at-bat and count.

If no legal sub is available, that spot would be an out...and would also have to be an out in any future at-bats for that vacated slot in the order.

 

FWIW; Unless there had been prior similar issues, I'd suggest finding some less severe method to deal with these sort of demonstrations. 

 

Here's a less severe way...don't draw lines on the umpire.  Can't get more friendly than that.  

[zm1283]

A little story about drawing lines and whether ejection is the right way to handle them....

 

About two years ago in a high school game, a batter drew a line on me and I ejected him. Last year I had the team again and the kid was a senior. I was working the bases and he was the shortstop. He comes up between innings and asks if I was the guy who ejected him the year before. I answer yes, and he apologizes and tells me how he learned his lesson and won't ever do that again. If that keeps one other umpire from having to deal with him drawing a line in the future, the ejection did its job. 

[kstrunk]

A little story about drawing lines and whether ejection is the right way to handle them....

 

About two years ago in a high school game, a batter drew a line on me and I ejected him. Last year I had the team again and the kid was a senior. I was working the bases and he was the shortstop. He comes up between innings and asks if I was the guy who ejected him the year before. I answer yes, and he apologizes and tells me how he learned his lesson and won't ever do that again. If that keeps one other umpire from having to deal with him drawing a line in the future, the ejection did its job. 

And as important as it is to prepare players and coaches for our fellow umpires' sake, how much more important to teach this young man respect for authority! He learned that he isn't in charge, and his opinion is NOT ultimate! Life lessons from baseball. 

[basejester]

My opinion is that the FYC is not and never was appropriate at any level.

 

Nobody should mind being seen doing something he was proud of.

[maven]

My opinion is that the FYC is not and never was appropriate at any level.

 

I'd agree to a qualified version of this: they're not appropriate to any amateur level.

 

Pro baseball is, well, a different ballgame. It has its own customs and rhythms, and those guys (players, skippers, umpires) all have to work a long season together. Add in the intensity of money and getting to/staying in the show, and the situation has variables that I don't presume to comprehend. For all I know, the FYC still has a place there. (The main reason to think otherwise is that the name of the game is now "get it right, whatever it takes," and the FYC is by definition getting it wrong.)

 

But for any level of ball I'll ever see, yeah, skip the FYC and use the proper game management strategies and tools.

[grayhawk]

Last week, was working a varsity winterball game and on a 1-1 pitch, the ball is near the outside corner, but is still over the white.  I call a strike and the batter asks me if that is the corner.  I respond, "there's still a little more room out there."  Next pitch is painted.  Batter asks if that's the corner and I respond "yep."

 

Next time this same batter comes up, first pitch is right down the middle at the knees.  Strike.  Second pitch is on the inside corner.  Strike.  Batter asks is that's the corner.  "Yep."  Now, he walks out of the box at the edge of the dirt circle and take a good long time to adjust his socks, shoelaces and batting gloves.  Granted, in a regular season game I would have instructed him to stay in the box (or get back in the box), but since this is winterball, I am thinking that he better be swinging.  Third pitch comes in, but catches more of the plate than the second and batter starts to go but doesn't.  Strike three!  He stands there and asks where that was and I tell him that it caught more of the plate than the second pitch.

 

Now, I wasn't exactly set on a FYC, but if it was close, he wasn't getting any benefit of the doubt.  This kid is a senior and has signed with a small college.  Good luck kid.

[johnnyg08]

Stupid questions.  "Did it catch the corner?"   I called it a strike didn't I?  

[Richvee]

Stupid questions.  "Did it catch the corner?"   I called it a strike didn't I?  

I think Greyhawk answered it right. I think it's a quick, polite way of asking if that's the outside edge of my zone. I  don't have an issue answering him once...maybe twice. In this case it sounds like the pitcher was hitting his spots pretty well...at least against this batter. 

[johnnyg08]

They obviously think it missed though.  

 

It's no different than "is that the top?"   Or  "is that the bottom" 

 

Implying that they're going to know if you call it and it's not.   "you told me that was the bottom..."  

 

Quite frankly, I'm not that good to discern that for every pitch and every batter where my exact absolutes are in my zone outside of the obvious.  

 

Yeah, I answer it nicely too...but it can get slippery pretty fast.

[grayhawk]

He was trying to find the limits of my zone. Funny thing is that I told him there was more room on the outside and he chose not to swing on a pitch just a little more out and got rung up. Then he hears me tell him where the inside corner is, and doesn't swing on the next pitch which catches even more of the plate.

[johnnyg08]

He was trying to find the limits of my zone. Funny thing is that I told him there was more room on the outside and he chose not to swing on a pitch just a little more out and got rung up. Then he hears me tell him where the inside corner is, and doesn't swing on the next pitch which catches even more of the plate.

 

I understand why they're asking.  I "get" everything about it.  

 

They're dumb questions though.  Nobody knows for 100% if those really are our limits.  At least for me, I don't think I can tell +/- 1/2" in/out/up/down with 100% accuracy and neither can the hitters.

[Majordave]

I wish I had a quarter for every batter that asks "is that the bottom/top of it?" "Is that as far out as it goes?"