NFHS Extra Hitter

[ElkOil]

At yesterday's game, the home coach listed an EH in his lineup. My partner had never heard of such a thing, and I had, although when pressed about it later, I couldn't recall the specific rule. When I got home, I looked it up, but couldn't find anything in the book about an EH in FED games. The closest I could find was 4-3, which states "Each team's lineup card shall list a minimum of nine players to start the game." I assume this includes subs, and not necessarily EH's? I also can't find anything that specifically prohibits EH's.

So are they legal or not?

[MRG9999]

Not legal in high school baseball. Extra hitter is legal in softball

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ElkOil]

2 hours ago, MRG9999 said:

Not legal in high school baseball. Extra hitter is legal in softball

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can you cite the rule? I can't find anything.

[Replacematt]

I looked...it appears NFHS never defines a lineup as nine positions.

[ElkOil]

53 minutes ago, Matt said:

I looked...it appears NFHS never defines a lineup as nine positions.

I thought the same thing.

[MRG9999]

True. There is a designated hitter allowed but only nine batters allowed in the lineup. The designated hitter is paired with a defensive player. The extra hitter is only softball. Will give rule a little later.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[spiffdawg7]

1 hour ago, MRG9999 said:

True. There is a designated hitter allowed but only nine batters allowed in the lineup. The designated hitter is paired with a defensive player. The extra hitter is only softball. Will give rule a little later.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fed does not allow an EH, but the confusion probably comes from summer tournaments allowing them.  For instance, Perfect Game allows up to 2 extra hitters in the lineup. 

Fed softball does not allow an EH either.  At least in Georgia.  I coach high school softball.  I don't know anything about the other softball rule sets since I don't umpire softball to know if any others allow an EH. 

[Pops]

He probably got this idea from some tournament or travel baseball league which may allow this. But not from HS baseball.

[maven]

8 hours ago, ElkOil said:

Can you cite the rule? I can't find anything.

The rules don't define or prohibit a Flopadop Hitter either. But I wouldn't let coach add an FH to his lineup.

But we can still do this: a fielder is any one of NINE players of the defensive team (2-13-1), and they're the ones allowed to bat when on offense (7-1-1). Then you can have a DH bat for one of the nine (3-1-4).

[ricka56]

I can't find anything in the RB about the EH. Nor can I find anything about the EEH or the EEEH or the EEEEH. I think nine players is presumed by the RB title: BASEBALL (except where the DH is detailed)..

[Rich Ives]

FED says the team is made up of "at least nine players" and the batting order has a "minimum of nine players" and the numbering of positions is "customary".

Sounds to me like you could thus have 10, 11, 12, 27, whatever players.  

[maven]

2 minutes ago, Rich Ives said:

FED says the team is made up of "at least nine players" and the batting order has a "minimum of nine players" and the numbering of positions is "customary".

Sounds to me like you could thus have 10, 11, 12, 27, whatever players.  

That's a team, not a lineup. The team includes starters and, if more than 9, substitutes.

The batting order is limited to 9 spots, though if a team uses substitutes on offense it will include more than 9 players in those 9 spots. When a team has fewer players than spots, we get an out for the empty spot each time it comes up, which is the point of mentioning a minimum of 9 players but allowing the possibility of more.

[Rich Ives]

4 minutes ago, maven said:

That's a team, not a lineup. The team includes starters and, if more than 9, substitutes.

The batting order is limited to 9 spots, though if a team uses substitutes on offense it will include more than 9 players in those 9 spots. When a team has fewer players than spots, we get an out for the empty spot each time it comes up, which is the point of mentioning a minimum of 9 players but allowing the possibility of more.

There are players and substitutes. Players are in the game. Subs are not.  And the rule DOES say "minimum of nine players" in the batting order.  Not nine. minimum of nine. AND you missed my   apparently.

[maven]

I saw your smilie, I just didn't know what to make of it, as I've never seen you pretend irony before.

[Rich Ives]

41 minutes ago, maven said:

I saw your smilie, I just didn't know what to make of it, as I've never seen you pretend irony before.

It's more about mis-written rules but whatever . . .

[Senor Azul]

Federation rules allow for ten starters if a team so chooses: 9 defenders and a DH (who bats for one of the nine defenders). So, only nine bat in the lineup.

Rule 1-1-1…Each of the two teams consists of at least nine players throughout the game (See Exception 4-4-1f)…

And then Diagram 1 shows the nine defensive positions.

Rule 1-1-3…A player is designated on the lineup card and in the scorebook by name, shirt number, batting order position and fielding position. A customary arrangement of the fielders is shown in Diagram 1.

The Federation’s use of phrases such as “at least nine players” and “list a minimum of nine players” refers to the option of a DH when the lineup could show ten names. There is no mention of an EH anywhere in the NFHS rules.

The EH rule is used in USSSA baseball tournaments. Here’s their actual rule:

Teams may bat a nine (9) player lineup, ten (10) player lineup using an Extra Hitter (EH) or continuous lineup of all present, eligible, uniformed players. Such lineup must be declared before the start of the game and used the entire game.

[ElkOil]

14 hours ago, maven said:

The rules don't define or prohibit a Flopadop Hitter either. But I wouldn't let coach add an FH to his lineup.

But we can still do this: a fielder is any one of NINE players of the defensive team (2-13-1), and they're the ones allowed to bat when on offense (7-1-1). Then you can have a DH bat for one of the nine (3-1-4).

My point being that when the rules address the lineup, there's no mention of limiting it to nine players or 10 with a DH, and in fact states a minimum -- yet no maximum -- requirement. It's not a stretch to think that an EH would be allowed, particularly when it's a common practice under other rule sets. Your example takes the argument to the absurd by making up a fictitious type of batter, which is not in the realm of reasonableness.  

[ALStripes17]

My point being that when the rules address the lineup, there's no mention of limiting it to nine players or 10 with a DH, and in fact states a minimum -- yet no maximum -- requirement. It's not a stretch to think that an EH would be allowed, particularly when it's a common practice under other rule sets. Your example takes the argument to the absurd by making up a fictitious type of batter, which is not in the realm of reasonableness.  

A particular rulebook has no sense of what other rule sets do...only what is in and of itself. It's absurd to think that 'because other rulesets allow it' that it can be applied here. The Flopadop Hitter was a great example IMO and very relative.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[scrounge]

6 hours ago, ElkOil said:

My point being that when the rules address the lineup, there's no mention of limiting it to nine players or 10 with a DH, and in fact states a minimum -- yet no maximum -- requirement. It's not a stretch to think that an EH would be allowed, particularly when it's a common practice under other rule sets. Your example takes the argument to the absurd by making up a fictitious type of batter, which is not in the realm of reasonableness.  

I don't mean this unkindly or in any way to be rude....but holy hell, man, you're WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY overthinking this. No, it's not in the lineup section. As @maven pointed out, it's quite clearly in the definitions section. So it doesn't need to be in the lineup section, because it's already been addressed.

Man, the season needs to get here quick

 

[noumpere]

1 hour ago, scrounge said:

Man, the season needs to get here quick

 

The EH is only allowed when the PU wears one ball bag.

If the PU wears two (or more) ball bags, the EH is not allowed.  In this situation, however, if the BU also wears a ball bag or ball bags, then a DEFO is allowed, unless the team chooses to bat the entire lineup.  Such a declaration by the team must be made verbally in writing on the line-up card given to the PU at the plate meeting, but failing to make such a declaration will not preclude such use of the option.

If the PU chooses to wear no ball bags, then any ball bags not worn must be the approved shade of heather gray.  Grey ball bags are not allowed.

[ALStripes17]

verbally in writing on the line-up card

Yes!

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[maven]

1 hour ago, noumpere said:

The EH is only allowed when the PU wears one ball bag.

If the PU wears two (or more) ball bags, the EH is not allowed.  In this situation, however, if the BU also wears a ball bag or ball bags, then a DEFO is allowed, unless the team chooses to bat the entire lineup.  Such a declaration by the team must be made verbally in writing on the line-up card given to the PU at the plate meeting, but failing to make such a declaration will not preclude such use of the option.

If the PU chooses to wear no ball bags, then any ball bags not worn must be the approved shade of heather gray.  Grey ball bags are not allowed.

Well played, sir.

[ElkOil]

It's times like this that all the flippant, snarky responses make me regret asking a legitimate question.

[Replacematt]

22 hours ago, scrounge said:

I don't mean this unkindly or in any way to be rude....but holy hell, man, you're WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY overthinking this. No, it's not in the lineup section. As @maven pointed out, it's quite clearly in the definitions section. So it doesn't need to be in the lineup section, because it's already been addressed.

Man, the season needs to get here quick

 

No, it isn't clearly anywhere. 7-1-1 doesn't come into play for any numerical limitations or other limitations on who can bat.

Not to mention, this is a situation that actually arose. There's no overthinking here.

[scrounge]

28 minutes ago, Matt said:

No, it isn't clearly anywhere. 7-1-1 doesn't come into play for any numerical limitations or other limitations on who can bat.

Not to mention, this is a situation that actually arose. There's no overthinking here.

Yes, indeed it is. 7-1-1 doesn't need to, because it's definitional and covered in rule 2. Just like first principles in law, the definitions will guide in these kinds of cases.