CR/Illegal Sub

[goody14]

This popped up on my association's FB page today and I thought it was interesting.

Please take the situation for what it is - yes, we all know that preventative umpiring could have stopped the whole thing.

Pitcher #1 is removed from the game. The player who had previously been a CR for the pitcher is now playing in the field.

Pitcher #2 gets a hit. Coach wants to use pitcher #1 as a CR.

Game resumes and DHC calls the illegal CR to the attention of the ump.

What I feel is clear: Pitcher #1 as an illegal CR is now an illegal sub and is called out and restricted.

My question: Since the CR is officially an illegal substitute, did the offense just remove Pitcher #2 from the game (which means that if he was a sub he is done for the day and if a starter he has to burn re-entry to pitch again)?

(For simplicity, let's assume that Pitcher #1 and Pitcher #2 are in different spots in the batting order. This means we cannot default to making the CR a legal substitute called the wrong thing by a coach).

 

 

 

[ricka56]

2 hours ago, goody14 said:

Pitcher #1 is removed from the game. The player who had previously been a CR for the pitcher is now playing in the field.

Pitcher #2 gets a hit. Coach wants to use pitcher #1 as a CR.

Game resumes and DHC calls the illegal CR to the attention of the ump.

What I feel is clear: Pitcher #1 as an illegal CR is now an illegal sub and is called out and restricted.

My question: Since the CR is officially an illegal substitute, did the offense just remove Pitcher #2 from the game (which means that if he was a sub he is done for the day and if a starter he has to burn re-entry to pitch again)?

That's a good one. Common sense and fair play (IMO) would say that #2 F1 (a sub without re-entry eligibility) would not be burned by the CR being turned into an illegal sub. But sometimes common sense and fair play are overridden by the rules.

I would ...
...pray that it doesn't happen to me.  

[ALStripes17]

This popped up on my association's FB page today and I thought it was interesting.
Please take the situation for what it is - yes, we all know that preventative umpiring could have stopped the whole thing.
Pitcher #1 is removed from the game. The player who had previously been a CR for the pitcher is now playing in the field.
Pitcher #2 gets a hit. Coach wants to use pitcher #1 as a CR.
Game resumes and DHC calls the illegal CR to the attention of the ump.
What I feel is clear: Pitcher #1 as an illegal CR is now an illegal sub and is called out and restricted.
My question: Since the CR is officially an illegal substitute, did the offense just remove Pitcher #2 from the game (which means that if he was a sub he is done for the day and if a starter he has to burn re-entry to pitch again)?
(For simplicity, let's assume that Pitcher #1 and Pitcher #2 are in different spots in the batting order. This means we cannot default to making the CR a legal substitute called the wrong thing by a coach).
 
 
 

Pitcher #1 had re-entry rules. Although he may not be able to run under CR rules... he was an eligible sub for pitcher #2. Allow him to return and pitcher #2 is done for the day.

Pitcher #1 does not have to return to the mound on the defensive side of the inning, as he is treated like any other pinch runner or pinch hitter for the pitcher.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[maven]

One of the umpires in our association routinely calls me with questions like this one. "I totally screwed up and put myself in a terrible position — what's the correct ruling?" The correct ruling is: don't put yourself in a terrible position. For me, this type of case is not terribly illuminating, as it doesn't tell me anything interesting about rules or mechanics (I already know that I should use them).

Keeping track of CR's and subs properly is not difficult and a crucial part of quality officiating. Many sports don't require officials to track subs, but baseball does. Failing to fulfill this responsibility, like failing to do any of what we're supposed to do, can lead to situations where we have to make something up to try to fix our own screwup.

Given the screwup, I suppose changing the "CR" to a re-entry makes sense. OTOH, the offense violated the CR rule by putting him in, so you could make a case for an illegal sub. Why should the fact that we screwed up buy the offense out of an out? Yawn. 

[noumpere]

I think the closest we can come is CR15, which, in a similar situation, has the pitcher return.  There's no mention or restriction on it being the starting pitcher, so it should apply to all.

[Donny7]

The Coach put Pitcher #1 in the game as a CR. It is unfortunate that it was not identified and corrected prior to the DHC's appeal... but it wasn't. We should not disallow the DHC's appeal... He was paying more attention to the game than the OHC or the Officials and there is a black and white rule (NO Grey) that he can point to. As an Official, we don't have a rule that states that we overlooked the illegal CR, and now we can call him a legal substitute. We should abide by the rule. 3-1-1 - For discovery of an illegal player on offense by an umpire or either team, that player shall be called out and restricted to the bench/dugout for the duration of the game.

Secondly, a CR is only termed a substitute when "illegal". 2-36-3e - A player who violates the courtesy runner rule. A CR is not a substitute.

The correct action is: The illegal CR is out and restricted to the bench for the duration of the game and a legal CR replaces him. Pitcher #2 is not affected by the use of an illegal CR. The intent of utilizing a CR to speed-up the game is not now and never has been to have any adverse effect on the pitcher/catcher being courtesy run for.   

[ALStripes17]

The Coach put Pitcher #1 in the game as a CR. It is unfortunate that it was not identified and corrected prior to the DHC's appeal... but it wasn't. We should not disallow the DHC's appeal... He was paying more attention to the game than the OHC or the Officials and there is a black and white rule (NO Grey) that he can point to. As an Official, we don't have a rule that states that we overlooked the illegal CR, and now we can call him a legal substitute. We should abide by the rule. 3-1-1 - For discovery of an illegal player on offense by an umpire or either team, that player shall be called out and restricted to the bench/dugout for the duration of the game.
Secondly, a CR is only termed a substitute when "illegal". 2-36-3e - A player who violates the courtesy runner rule. A CR is not a substitute.
The correct action is: The illegal CR is out and restricted to the bench for the duration of the game and a legal CR replaces him. Pitcher #2 is not affected by the use of an illegal CR. The intent of utilizing a CR to speed-up the game is not now and never has been to have any adverse effect on the pitcher/catcher being courtesy run for.   

We aren't overlooking an illegal CR. It's a fact that the runner can be considered a legal substitute/pinch runner as long as he has eligibility to be said substitute. Do we have guidance anywhere that suggests otherwise?

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[maven]

2 hours ago, Donny7 said:

The correct action is: The illegal CR is out and restricted to the bench for the duration of the game and a legal CR replaces him.   

You just restricted the starting pitcher, because you screwed up the CR. Good luck with your EJ and report to the state.

I'm fairly confident that my state would not support this approach in this situation, given that (a) the official screwed up in accepting the CR, and (b) we have an alternative: we can just re-enter the starter and make him legal.

One man's "correct action" is another man's "poor game management."

[Donny7]

9 hours ago, ALStripes17 said:

We aren't overlooking an illegal CR. It's a fact that the runner can be considered a legal substitute/pinch runner as long as he has eligibility to be said substitute. Do we have guidance anywhere that suggests otherwise?

Pitcher #1 could have been re-entered as a legal substitute, but he wasn't. The OHC entered him as a CR, he was officially documented and announced as a CR. As an official we do not have the right or authority to pull him out of that CR status and place him into a legal substitute status... That is the OHC's decision. Depending on the game circumstances, most OHC's would likely elect to take the out and put Pitcher #1 back on the bench and keep Pitcher #2 legal and active, especially with the new premium on pitch counts. Again that's a coaches decision not an umpires.   

 

[Donny7]

9 hours ago, maven said:

You just restricted the starting pitcher, because you screwed up the CR. Good luck with your EJ and report to the state.

I'm fairly confident that my state would not support this approach in this situation, given that (a) the official screwed up in accepting the CR, and (b) we have an alternative: we can just re-enter the starter and make him legal.

One man's "correct action" is another man's "poor game management."

I would anticipate an extremely minute percentage chance that an EJ would be necessary. His starting Pitcher was on the bench, and now the OHC put him in as a CR. I would think if he had any plans of returning him to the mound that he had someone else on the bench that could run.

It is unfortunate that this was not caught and corrected. Both officials and coaches failed to notice the infraction. I don't think that any of us could raise our hands and say we've never made mistakes as an official ... but that's why we have rules and the rules governing this are crystal clear. The OP stated "Game resumes and DHC calls the illegal CR to the attention of the ump"

On ‎4‎/‎14‎/‎2017 at 8:00 AM, goody14 said:

My question: Since the CR is officially an illegal substitute, did the offense just remove Pitcher #2 from the game (which means that if he was a sub he is done for the day and if a starter he has to burn re-entry to pitch again)?

The CR is a unique player/runner who is NEVER considered a legal substitute. Only for the purpose of labeling is an illegal CR termed an illegal substitute. As long as the CR remains as a CR, legal or illegal, it has no effect on, in this case, Pitcher #2.

[ALStripes17]

Pitcher #1 could have been re-entered as a legal substitute, but he wasn't. The OHC entered him as a CR, he was officially documented and announced as a CR. As an official we do not have the right or authority to pull him out of that CR status and place him into a legal substitute status... That is the OHC's decision. Depending on the game circumstances, most OHC's would likely elect to take the out and put Pitcher #1 back on the bench and keep Pitcher #2 legal and active, especially with the new premium on pitch counts. Again that's a coaches decision not an umpires.   

 

I will continue to disagree with you on rendering this as an illegal substitute situation. He is a starter with re-entry ability. I, and many others, will treat it as such.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[Richvee]

Yes. The official screwed the pooch allowing SP1 to enter as a CR. However, once you announce him as such to the scorer, and then the DHC says he's an illegal CR, I think we're bound by the rule. I think there would be a bigger chance of an EJ (of the DHC) if, after the DHC says that's an illegal CR, the umpire then goes back to the OHC and says, "Dan, he's right, SP1 cannot be a CR. Would you like SP1 in reenter under the reentry rule as a pinch runner instead?" I would expect the DHC to be livid, and perhaps rightfully so. He was on the ball, and the official and the OHC were not, and now he doesn't get the out the rule book mandates because the official is offering the OHC an alternative to what he just did wrong? (isn't this at least somewhat akin to an umpire coaching?)

The official screwed it up allowing and announcing SP1 as a CR. The OHC made a substitution mistake that could have been prevented by the official had he been on the ball with a simple "You can't do that" BEFORE the fact . After it's announced, it has gotten to the point beyond where preventive officiating can be used. He now needs to follow the rules.  He made himself a $h*t sandwich, now he's got to eat it.

[noumpere]

9 hours ago, Richvee said:

 I think there would be a bigger chance of an EJ (of the DHC) if, after the DHC says that's an illegal CR, the umpire then goes back to the OHC and says, "Dan, he's right, SP1 cannot be a CR. Would you like SP1 in reenter under the reentry rule as a pinch runner instead?"

SP1 cannot re-enter to pinch run for Pitcher 2 -- they are in different spots in the batting order.  That's a worse mistake, imo, than having a CR error.

[Richvee]

On 4/14/2017 at 9:00 AM, goody14 said:

Pitcher #1 is removed from the game. The player who had previously been a CR for the pitcher is now playing in the field.

 

3 hours ago, noumpere said:

SP1 cannot re-enter to pinch run for Pitcher 2 -- they are in different spots in the batting order.  That's a worse mistake, imo, than having a CR error.

Maybe I read it wrong. I took this as 2 separate substitutions. I assumed Sp2 for SP1 was a straight up sub earlier at some point and CR1 entered into the game for another player in the field. 

[noumpere]

15 minutes ago, Richvee said:

 

Maybe I read it wrong. I took this as 2 separate substitutions. I assumed Sp2 for SP1 was a straight up sub earlier at some point and CR1 entered into the game for another player in the field. 

From the OP: " let's assume that Pitcher #1 and Pitcher #2 are in different spots in the batting order. "

[Richvee]

24 minutes ago, noumpere said:

From the OP: " let's assume that Pitcher #1 and Pitcher #2 are in different spots in the batting order. "

My bad. Bottom line then..Don't let this happen to you..keep a good scorecard avoid this nasty situation. 

[Richvee]

And to actually answer the question in the OP, I'd say I CR, legal or illegal does not remove the player being ran for from the lineup. If a starter, he does not need to reenter and if a sub, he is not lost for the game. 

[BrianC14]

Maybe I have this confused,  but how could the second pitcher substitute for SP1 and end up in a different spot in the batting order? 

[Donny7]

1 hour ago, BrianC14 said:

Maybe I have this confused,  but how could the second pitcher substitute for SP1 and end up in a different spot in the batting order? 

The OP stated the following because he was concerned that the OHC and the Ump would just get together and claim a "mis-speak" from a CR to a Pinch Runner. He wanted to make sure the example given was only relevant to an illegal CR, but... as you can read, that didn't happen.   

OP STATEMENT: (For simplicity, let's assume that Pitcher #1 and Pitcher #2 are in different spots in the batting order. This means we cannot default to making the CR a legal substitute called the wrong thing by a coach).

[BrianC14]

Thanks,  missed that.  I was going strictly on the original. 

[noumpere]

6 hours ago, BrianC14 said:

Maybe I have this confused,  but how could the second pitcher substitute for SP1 and end up in a different spot in the batting order? 

Pitcher 2 didn't substitute for pitcher 1.  For example, maybe, pitcher 2 was the shortstop, and the CR entered the game to play shortstop when pitcher 1 left the game.