NFHS Extra Hitter

[Replacematt]

2 hours ago, scrounge said:

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.

If it was in the definitions, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[ElkOil]

On 3/1/2016 at 7:01 AM, 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

 

I've read through Section 2 a number of times and can't find any reference that illustrates your point. What definition are you referring to?

[ALStripes17]

Are we still talking about sof???... Sooofff???.... Softb???.... Ugh yeah I can't even say it

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[cp9]

NFHS 4-2-1

Each team must have nine players in its lineup throughout the game (see 4-4-1f Note 2). Otherwise, the game will be forfeited.

There is your rule against having 10 batters.

 

[Replacematt]

14 minutes ago, cp9 said:

NFHS 4-2-1

Each team must have nine players in its lineup throughout the game (see 4-4-1f Note 2). Otherwise, the game will be forfeited.

There is your rule against having 10 batters.

 

There's an implied "at least" in there because of the restrictions in that note. When you look at 1-1-2, when using a DH, there has to be ten in the lineup.

[ElkOil]

42 minutes ago, cp9 said:

NFHS 4-2-1

Each team must have nine players in its lineup throughout the game (see 4-4-1f Note 2). Otherwise, the game will be forfeited.

There is your rule against having 10 batters.

 

I'd agree if 4-1-3 didn't say "minimum of nine players" and we know for a fact you can finish a game with eight. So, no, that's not a rule against having 10 batters.

[ALStripes17]

There's an implied "at least" in there because of the restrictions in that note. When you look at 1-1-2, when using a DH, there has to be ten in the lineup.

Is it really 10 in the lineup or are there 10 people occupying 9 spots in the lineup, as the hitter is designated as half a spot (offensive) while the fielder for whom the DH is designated is half a spot (defensive)?

I still believe 2-13-1 gives us a very applicable statement as to the number of spots within a lineup. You can't have more than nine fielders on a team, and only one of those nine spots can have a designated hitter (half and half principle)

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[cp9]

57 minutes ago, Matt said:

There's an implied "at least" in there because of the restrictions in that note. When you look at 1-1-2, when using a DH, there has to be ten in the lineup.

It is "implied" that the lineup constitutes the batting order.  4-2-1 states that you must have 9 players, not 10, 14, or 275.  The DH and the player for whom he is batting are in the same slot.

3-1-4  A designated hitter and the player for whom he is batting are locked into the batting order.

 

 

 

[scrounge]

On 3/3/2016 at 8:31 PM, ElkOil said:

I'd agree if 4-1-3 didn't say "minimum of nine players" and we know for a fact you can finish a game with eight. So, no, that's not a rule against having 10 batters.

 

Yes, 4-1-3 says the *team* must have a minimum of 9 players to start the game. And a *team*, by the same rule, must have at least 8 throughout.  That section - quite explicity - is about starting the game. 9 or must be present, available. Just like all players on the *team* must be listed on the lineup card - explicitly including substitutes. The term 'substitutes' is completely nonsensical if the entire team is in the starting lineup. But beyond that, you can't separate 4-1-3, which talks about the requirements to *start* the game, from ALL the other rules that talk about *playing* the game. Specifically:

• 2-1-13 gives us the definition of a fielder, which is one of the 9 players on the defensive team. If this was the same definition as players on the *team*, then each and every team would have to have nine and only nine players. This is absurd to read it as anything but that 9 are in the game at any one time
• 4-4-1 gives us the exception that a team (of which there are clearly at least 9 or more members) may *play* with 8 after the start, but specifies the penalty of an out every time that position comes to bat.
• Only players in the game may come to bat - otherwise the entirety of the substitution and re-entry rules are completely illogical. There is a very detailed and specific exception - the DH. And the rules go into great detail of how that does NOT and can NOT modify the number of defensive players. Which, as we've already seen, is 9. 9 is the number, and the number shall be 9. Unless it's 8, per 4-4-1.
• As 2-1-13 limits us to 9 players on the defense and only they may come to bat (unless the DH occupies the batting position in the stead of one of the def players), any other player who comes to bat is either - by black letter of the rule book - a reported or unreported sub. How can an EH enter the batting box without being a sub? He can't. 3.3.1 clearly says that a player not otherwise in the game (in other words, a substitute) or a DH is now a sub once he enters the box. This alone makes the idea of an EH impossble. Otherwise the unreported sub rule makes no sense, the substitution rules make no sense, none of it does.

 

 

[ALStripes17]

I'd agree if 4-1-3 didn't say "minimum of nine players" and we know for a fact you can finish a game with eight. So, no, that's not a rule against having 10 batters.

1-1-3 gives us good standard for the def'n of a player, of which we can only have nine on defense. The DH rule gives us the sole exception to that as a hitter can be designated for one starting player (we can logically assume 'fielder' unless we want to get into sending in a designated hitter for someone who is solely a hitter anyway?)

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[ALStripes17]

So, we're still doing this, huh? [sigh]

Yes, 4-1-3 says the *team* must have a minimum of 9 players to start the game. And a *team*, by the same rule, must have at least 8 throughout.  That section - quite explicity - is about starting the game. 9 or must be present, available. Just like all players on the *team* must be listed on the lineup card - explicitly including substitutes. The term 'substitutes' is completely nonsensical if the entire team is in the starting lineup. But beyond that, you can't separate 4-1-3, which talks about the requirements to *start* the game, from ALL the other rules that talk about *playing* the game. Specifically:

• 2-1-13 gives us the definition of a fielder, which is one of the 9 players on the defensive team. If this was the same definition as players on the *team*, then each and every team would have to have nine and only nine players. This is absurd to read it as anything but that 9 are in the game at any one time
• 4-4-1 gives us the exception that a team (of which there are clearly at least 9 or more members) may *play* with 8 after the start, but specifies the penalty of an out every time that position comes to bat.
• Only players in the game may come to bat - otherwise the entirety of the substitution and re-entry rules are completely illogical. There is a very detailed and specific exception - the DH. And the rules go into great detail of how that does NOT and can NOT modify the number of defensive players. Which, as we've already seen, is 9. 9 is the number, and the number shall be 9. Unless it's 8, per 4-4-1.
• As 2-1-13 limits us to 9 players on the defense and only they may come to bat (unless the DH occupies the batting position in the stead of one of the def players), any other player who comes to bat is either - by black letter of the rule book - either a reported or unreported sub. How can an EH enter the batting box without being a sub? He can't. Otherwise the unreported sub rule makes no sense, the substitution rules make no sense, none of it does.

I'm sorry, this is an unserious discussion.

 

Something has to keep us peons entertained on Hump Day...

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[ElkOil]

On 3/3/2016 at 8:08 PM, scrounge said:

So, we're still doing this, huh? [sigh]

Yes, 4-1-3 says the *team* must have a minimum of 9 players to start the game. And a *team*, by the same rule, must have at least 8 throughout.  That section - quite explicity - is about starting the game. 9 or must be present, available. Just like all players on the *team* must be listed on the lineup card - explicitly including substitutes. The term 'substitutes' is completely nonsensical if the entire team is in the starting lineup. But beyond that, you can't separate 4-1-3, which talks about the requirements to *start* the game, from ALL the other rules that talk about *playing* the game. Specifically:

• 2-1-13 gives us the definition of a fielder, which is one of the 9 players on the defensive team. If this was the same definition as players on the *team*, then each and every team would have to have nine and only nine players. This is absurd to read it as anything but that 9 are in the game at any one time
• 4-4-1 gives us the exception that a team (of which there are clearly at least 9 or more members) may *play* with 8 after the start, but specifies the penalty of an out every time that position comes to bat.
• Only players in the game may come to bat - otherwise the entirety of the substitution and re-entry rules are completely illogical. There is a very detailed and specific exception - the DH. And the rules go into great detail of how that does NOT and can NOT modify the number of defensive players. Which, as we've already seen, is 9. 9 is the number, and the number shall be 9. Unless it's 8, per 4-4-1.
• As 2-1-13 limits us to 9 players on the defense and only they may come to bat (unless the DH occupies the batting position in the stead of one of the def players), any other player who comes to bat is either - by black letter of the rule book - a reported or unreported sub. How can an EH enter the batting box without being a sub? He can't. 3.3.1 clearly says that a player not otherwise in the game (in other words, a substitute) or a DH is now a sub once he enters the box. This alone makes the idea of an EH impossble. Otherwise the unreported sub rule makes no sense, the substitution rules make no sense, none of it does.

I'm sorry, this is an unserious discussion.

 

For someone who doesn't seem to like the conversation, you have a lot to say. I appreciate the substance of your comments yet find it discouraging that you saw fit to sandwich an excellent response between snarky remarks.

[scrounge]

19 minutes ago, ElkOil said:

For someone who doesn't seem to like the conversation, you have a lot to say. I appreciate the substance of your comments yet find it discouraging that you saw fit to sandwich an excellent response between snarky remarks.

My apologies, i meant no insult...snarky's just kind of my default, but I really did intend it in a lighthearted manner. I will edit out those parts.

[ElkOil]

35 minutes ago, scrounge said:

My apologies, i meant no insult...snarky's just kind of my default, but I really did intend it in a lighthearted manner. I will edit out those parts.

Spoken like a gentleman, sir! And thank you for such excellent info.