Jump to content
  • 0

FED DH Rule Change


Guest R. Duke
Umpire-Empire locks topics which have not been active in the last year. The thread you are viewing hasn't been active in 1569 days so you will not be able to post. We do recommend you starting a new topic to find out what's new in the world of umpiring.

Question

Guest R. Duke

Hope Lawump is out there,  just found out about the DH change.  Jones starts as P/DH then Smith comes

in to pitch.  I know that if someone runs for Jones the DH is dead but Jones has re-entry rights as a starter.

Is Smith allowed to run for Jones or must someone else run as Smith must exit now that  the DH is dead?

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0
9 hours ago, andydufresne said:

I guess I'll have to keep an eye on this. 3.1.4.F (c) and 3.1.4.J (b) are irreconcilable. How they plan to have the DH play a defensive position other than the one he is DHing for and remain the DH for that position is too much for me to comprehend. I think they're being too clever by half based on what I've read here.

 

Who bats where F9 was hitting? It can't be F1; he's locked into the 3 hole where Sanders is hitting.

 

F9, the previous catcher, still bats in his spot. Whoever is pitching would be one of the current defensive players, say the previous F9, or a sub for one of them, batting in that slot. I'll edit the card to show that.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
On 11/12/2019 at 1:26 PM, lawump said:

I will add, even though this is not covered by the case plays, a player who starts as a P/DH or C/DH, cannot have a courtesy runner enter the game for them should they reach base.

This is per an email I received from B. Elliot Hopkins on September 8, 2019.  (Of course, check with your own state rules person to see if they are going to follow Mr. Hopkins' email or not.)

After reading through everything and reading the pre season guide, I will make it a point that the courtesy runner issue is discussed at out state interpretation meeting. This has the possibility of being a $h*t show if all umpires aren’t on the same page on this. 
 

I would assume we’ll see the dual role be p/ DH  more than any other position, and the CR issue is going to come up almost every game.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
13 hours ago, Richvee said:

After reading through everything and reading the pre season guide, I will make it a point that the courtesy runner issue is discussed at out state interpretation meeting. This has the possibility of being a $h*t show if all umpires aren’t on the same page on this. 
 

I would assume we’ll see the dual role be p/ DH  more than any other position, and the CR issue is going to come up almost every game.  

Yup; I had to remind our state assistant commissioner for baseball about this during our state meeting.  It caused a lot of "say what's" to be muttered by the umpires in attendance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
5 minutes ago, lawump said:

Yup; I had to remind our state assistant commissioner for baseball about this during our state meeting.  It caused a lot of "say what's" to be muttered by the umpires in attendance.

I know you're no longer in the committee, but I'd assume you're still a little more hooked into the situation than the rest of us, so I've got to ask, do you think the posted interp is what NFHS wants? (I.e, no courtesy for F/DH?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
44 minutes ago, Biscuit said:

I know you're no longer in the committee, but I'd assume you're still a little more hooked into the situation than the rest of us, so I've got to ask, do you think the posted interp is what NFHS wants? (I.e, no courtesy for F/DH?)

My (non-official) guess is that this is exactly what was wanted.  The CR is for a P or a C (i.e, a DEFENSIVE player).   The person batting is the DH (i.e., an OFFENSIVE player).  The fact that it's physically the same person doesn't alter the roles.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
2 hours ago, noumpere said:

My (non-official) guess is that this is exactly what was wanted.  The CR is for a P or a C (i.e, a DEFENSIVE player).   The person batting is the DH (i.e., an OFFENSIVE player).  The fact that it's physically the same person doesn't alter the roles.

 

Exactly.  You wouldn’t have allowed a CR for a DH before, so don’t do it now.


Side rant ... :ranton:

Courtesy runners may be used by the offense, but they are NOT about the offense.  They are about get the defense moving quicker at the top of the inning.  (This rule seems to be counterproductive in that regard, but that isn’t what I am ranting about.)

:rantoff:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, The Man in Blue said:

 

Exactly.  You wouldn’t have allowed a CR for a DH before, so don’t do it now.


Side rant ... :ranton:

Courtesy runners may be used by the offense, but they are NOT about the offense.  They are about get the defense moving quicker at the top of the inning.  (This rule seems to be counterproductive in that regard, but that isn’t what I am ranting about.)

:rantoff:

 

 

As a catcher (who can get his gear on reasonably quickly, but also happens too be fairly slow on the bases), I agree.

:ranton: I don't hold up the game by being on the bases when the third out is recorded. Generally, the pitcher will have only thrown one, maybe two, warmups by the time I'm ready to take over for whoever goes out to warm them up. Sometimes, I'm ready before the pitcher! (But that's just because I play on a bad team that don't know the game). Though, strategically, I can't really fault my coaches on putting a CR in... I really do need to work on some speed.:rantoff:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
4 hours ago, noumpere said:

My (non-official) guess is that this is exactly what was wanted.  The CR is for a P or a C (i.e, a DEFENSIVE player).   The person batting is the DH (i.e., an OFFENSIVE player).  The fact that it's physically the same person doesn't alter the roles.

 

2 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

 

Exactly.  You wouldn’t have allowed a CR for a DH before, so don’t do it now.


Side rant ... :ranton:

Courtesy runners may be used by the offense, but they are NOT about the offense.  They are about get the defense moving quicker at the top of the inning.  (This rule seems to be counterproductive in that regard, but that isn’t what I am ranting about.)

:rantoff:

 

 

Well, now I'm confused.

 

If the guy on base is going to pitch or catch the next inning, why wouldn't he be able to get a courtesy runner...if the courtesy runner rule is indeed meant to speed up the changeover between innings.

:ranton:IMO - there should never be a CR allowed for the pitcher...he doesn't need to change costume.  Also, CR should only be allowed with two out.   I also prefer the rule sets that have the CR be the further batter from the catcher...as opposed to using bench players.  This rule has turned into a half-assed ploy to get more players into the game, to make players and parents feel better about things...it's supposed to be purely about speeding the game up.   So many changes to this rule over the year have just made it a pile of donkey SH*#.:rantoff:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
2 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

 

Well, now I'm confused.

 

If the guy on base is going to pitch or catch the next inning, why wouldn't he be able to get a courtesy runner...if the courtesy runner rule is indeed meant to speed up the changeover between innings.

:ranton:IMO - there should never be a CR allowed for the pitcher...he doesn't need to change costume.  Also, CR should only be allowed with two out.   I also prefer the rule sets that have the CR be the further batter from the catcher...as opposed to using bench players.  This rule has turned into a half-assed ploy to get more players into the game, to make players and parents feel better about things...it's supposed to be purely about speeding the game up.   So many changes to this rule over the year have just made it a pile of donkey SH*#.:rantoff:


A.). That was part of my point ... it actually diminishes the actual purpose.

B.)  Rant correct on all parts.

C.)  Who the hell downvoted noumpere’s answer?!  :WTF  Show your face coward!  :FIRE:

D.). It’s Friday and I am exhausted this week, so I am being a little more glib than usual.  :cheers:

E.)  I believe there should be a constitutional amendment outlawing the designated hitter.

6.)  Just remembered there is a new episode of The Mandalorian out today ... that cute little guy makes me smile.

VII.) Going to go pick up Chinese and crack open a beer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
22 hours ago, Biscuit said:

I know you're no longer in the committee, but I'd assume you're still a little more hooked into the situation than the rest of us, so I've got to ask, do you think the posted interp is what NFHS wants? (I.e, no courtesy for F/DH?)

Yes.  The interpretation came from the NFHS.  When a player plays both positions (defense and DH), when he is batting he is ONLY the DH (as he is playing two different positions, and he can't play them both at the same time.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
17 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

If the guy on base is going to pitch or catch the next inning, why wouldn't he be able to get a courtesy runner...

Be careful here: the CR rule has never been about who is going to pitch or catch the next inning.  In order to have a CR run for you, you had to have been the P or C the prior inning.  (This has nothing to do with the new Def.Player/DH rule.)

For Example:  Smith plays as F2 in the top of the fifth inning.  In the bottom of the 5th inning Smith is due to lead off, but the HTHC sends Jones to pinch hit.  Jones receives a base on balls.  The HTHC attempts to put in a courtesy runner (as the HTHC says Jones will remain in the game and play F2 in the top of the sixth inning.)  This would not be allowed as Jones did not play F2 the prior half inning.  (If Smith had a re-entry available, the HTHC could re-enter Smith into the game (ending Jones' day) and then use a CR, but Smith would now have to catch in the top of the sixth (or another sub (not Jones) could enter to catch (which would end Smith's day).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, lawump said:

Be careful here: the CR rule has never been about who is going to pitch or catch the next inning.  In order to have a CR run for you, you had to have been the P or C the prior inning.  (This has nothing to do with the new Def.Player/DH rule.)

For Example:  Smith plays as F2 in the top of the fifth inning.  In the bottom of the 5th inning Smith is due to lead off, but the HTHC sends Jones to pinch hit.  Jones receives a base on balls.  The HTHC attempts to put in a courtesy runner (as the HTHC says Jones will remain in the game and play F2 in the top of the sixth inning.)  This would not be allowed as Jones did not play F2 the prior half inning.  (If Smith had a re-entry available, the HTHC could re-enter Smith into the game (ending Jones' day) and then use a CR, but Smith would now have to catch in the top of the sixth (or another sub (not Jones) could enter to catch (which would end Smith's day).

Using this logic, why couldn't you CR for the P/DH? While yes, they may be playing as the DH now, they are still the pitcher of record, thus should be eligible to be courtesy ran for. The intent and the writing of the courtesy runner rule doesn't seem to have with this interp handed down from on high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Because the pitcher/catcher is not batting.  The DH is batting.  You cannot courtesy run for the DH.

 

Yes, it is a flaw.  And yes, we will get some cockamamie correction in a year or two.  
 

:sarcasm: Or, better yet we won’t bother to fix the rule, we will just make up another interpretation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
On 12/7/2019 at 8:37 AM, lawump said:

Be careful here: the CR rule has never been about who is going to pitch or catch the next inning.  In order to have a CR run for you, you had to have been the P or C the prior inning.  (This has nothing to do with the new Def.Player/DH rule.)

For Example:  Smith plays as F2 in the top of the fifth inning.  In the bottom of the 5th inning Smith is due to lead off, but the HTHC sends Jones to pinch hit.  Jones receives a base on balls.  The HTHC attempts to put in a courtesy runner (as the HTHC says Jones will remain in the game and play F2 in the top of the sixth inning.)  This would not be allowed as Jones did not play F2 the prior half inning.  (If Smith had a re-entry available, the HTHC could re-enter Smith into the game (ending Jones' day) and then use a CR, but Smith would now have to catch in the top of the sixth (or another sub (not Jones) could enter to catch (which would end Smith's day).

The spirit of the rule, in its original inception, was about who was going to pitch/catch in the next inning, to speed up the transition between offense and defense - and it operated on the assumption that the guy who pitched/caught the last inning was going to continue to do so - so, yes, there was a bit of a loophole there that could be taken advantage of, but the rule was, originally, and in other certain rule sets (like baseball and softball in Canada) it still is, about speeding up the game - ie. getting the catcher off the field and changing his gear while the inning completes - especially in time limit leagues and tournaments.   

You're only speeding up the game if the pitcher/catcher on base is going in the next inning....if it turns out the coach swaps one or the other, oh well...it doesn't happen enough to worry about it.   You set the benchmark of the pitcher/catcher who was in there the last inning so you don't have to deal with coaches saying "oh he's my catcher now".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
43 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

I'm glad CA does not adopt the CR rule.  It's a pain in the ass and doesn't really speed anything up.

It does if it's done right.

I was completely floored the first time I coached a tourney in the US with the convoluted way the CR rule is handled.

All my life in Canadian league and tournament play, in baseball or softball, it was simple, easy, and it did, and still does, speed things up.

First - only applies to catchers.

Second - only with two out

Third - player in batting lineup, not the subs, furthest from the catcher, who is not already on base, runs for catcher.   Catcher goes to bench and gets his/her gear on.

Other team is responsible to identify if wrong player is put in, just like MYTAB.

Simple.

Brief "time" call to put in CR.  No dicking around with lineup cards, and who CR's for who.   99% of the time the swap is done in a matter of seconds....and 99% of the time the catcher is now ready with gear on to warm up the pitcher the next half inning.

 

Administrators outsmarted themselves when they made it a ploy to get more players into the game.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
35 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

99% of the time the catcher is now ready with gear on to warm up the pitcher the next half inning.

Therein lies the problem - it's more around 50% in high school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
3 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

The spirit of the rule, in its original inception, was about who was going to pitch/catch in the next inning, to speed up the transition between offense and defense 

I don't disagree.  That's why...while I posted the NFHS' interpretation that an offensive sub cannot have a CR...I disagree with their logic.  I made the same arguments to them that you have made in this thread.  As you can see, I lost.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Ok, for sure this will be the bane of my umpiring existence this Spring ....   so ....need to brush up on this.

Question: The first few posts threw in a caveat that the wording, etc wasn't "official" .... do we have OFFICIAL wording, rule and case plays now? @lawump ...was your posts prior to this with specific case plays, etc the OFFICIAL word?

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
47 minutes ago, Thunderheads said:

Question: The first few posts threw in a caveat that the wording, etc wasn't "official" .... do we have OFFICIAL wording, rule and case plays now? @lawump ...was your posts prior to this with specific case plays, etc the OFFICIAL word?

Thanks

The posts in which I begin with, for example, "3.1.4 Situation F" are directly from the 2020 Casebook (of which I have a hard copy).  Thus, they are official.

@yawetag has posted a link to the 2020 preseason guide (of which I also have a hard copy), which has other case plays.

The post about not being allowed to use a CR for the P/DH or C/DH is directly from an email I sent to Elliott Hopkins in September.  Since it is not in the casebook or preseason guide, you will need to check with your state rules interpreter to see if that is what your state is going to follow.  I can tell you that South Carolina will follow Mr. Hopkins' email.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
6 minutes ago, lawump said:

The posts in which I begin with, for example, "3.1.4 Situation F" are directly from the 2020 Casebook (of which I have a hard copy).  Thus, they are official.

@yawetag has posted a link to the 2020 preseason guide (of which I also have a hard copy), which has other case plays.

The post about not being allowed to use a CR for the P/DH or C/DH is directly from an email I sent to Elliott Hopkins in September.  Since it is not in the casebook or preseason guide, you will need to check with your state rules interpreter to see if that is what your state is going to follow.  I can tell you that South Carolina will follow Mr. Hopkins' email.

THanks, ....so, the pre-season guide is official?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...