R1, R2...offense has a conference and try to switch the runners

[SeeingEyeDog]

FED and we have R1 and R2. The coach calls time out and gets together with his runners for a brief (charged) conference. Coming out of the conference, R1 goes to 2B and R2 goes to 1B. What do you have and when can we make a call? If someone has a citation on this, that would be great...

~Dawg

[Jimurray]

10 minutes ago, SeeingEyeDog said:

FED and we have R1 and R2. The coach calls time out and gets together with his runners for a brief (charged) conference. Coming out of the conference, R1 goes to 2B and R2 goes to 1B. What do you have and when can we make a call? If someone has a citation on this, that would be great...

~Dawg

2018

SITUATION 18: With the game tied in the bottom of the seventh inning, the home team has runners on first base and second base. During a time-out, R1 and R2 switch places to put the fastest runner on second base so that the team has a better chance to score from second base. The ball is made live and the defensive coach notices the changes and tells the plate umpire. RULING: The umpire shall call both runners out (one for passing a runner and another out for running the bases in reverse order) and eject them. A warning is given to the coach unless the umpire knows without a doubt the coach was involved, in which case the coach would be ejected. If the switch was detected before the ball was made live, the infraction would be corrected with only a warning given to the team. [3-3-1f(4); 8-4-2m, n]

[SeeingEyeDog]

Thanks, @Jimurray...I want to understand that last sentence. So, if an umpire sees this BEFORE the ball is put back into play, we can correct the runners and warn the head coach on offense. If an umpire does NOT see this until AFTER the ball is put into play AND the head coach of the defense specifically tells the PLATE umpire, then we grab an out on each runner AND eject both of them AND warn the head coach of the offense or proceed directly to an ejection if they think the coach is involved. Do I have all of that correct?

It seems unlikely that if the plate umpire KNOWS the coach is involved, he would not wait until the ball is in play...yes?

~Dawg 

[DevildogUmp]

@SeeingEyeDogI would say that it doesn't matter who discovers the swap. If it is caught before the ball is made live, fix it. If the ball is made live, penalize as directed. 

[Tborze]

I’ve been watching and waiting 20+ years for this to happen. 
 

If/when it does, I’ll be waiting for the ball to become live before I “notice”.  

[Catch18]

I’ve been watching and waiting 20+ years for this to happen. 
 
If/when it does, I’ll be waiting for the ball to become live before I “notice”.  

{checks indicator for an inordinate amount of time to ensure the count is correct}

[Catch18]

2018
SITUATION 18: With the game tied in the bottom of the seventh inning, the home team has runners on first base and second base. During a time-out, R1 and R2 switch places to put the fastest runner on second base so that the team has a better chance to score from second base. The ball is made live and the defensive coach notices the changes and tells the plate umpire. RULING: The umpire shall call both runners out (one for passing a runner and another out for running the bases in reverse order) and eject them. A warning is given to the coach unless the umpire knows without a doubt the coach was involved, in which case the coach would be ejected. If the switch was detected before the ball was made live, the infraction would be corrected with only a warning given to the team. [3-3-1f(4); 8-4-2m, n]

I had no idea this existed. This ruling is utterly amazing. And I’ve always wanted to (proverbially) set a field on fire - I think these ingredients call for such a situation.

[834k3r]

[Jimurray]

1 hour ago, Catch18 said:

I had no idea this existed. This ruling is utterly amazing. And I’ve always wanted to (proverbially) set a field on fire - I think these ingredients call for such a situation.

I think we had some posts on U-E before this ruling came out where the consensus was to punish cheating and enforcing passing and reverse running was espoused by most. But, while I do check runners returning to proper bases as BU, I haven’t checked proper runners on the proper bases. Has the OP ever been an actual occurrence?

[834k3r]

3 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

But, while I do check runners returning to proper bases as BU, I haven’t checked proper runners on the proper bases.

Same.

[Senor Azul]

I found the following info in the 2016 BRD--

This 2018 interpretation actually first appeared in the online interpretations in 2003 as Situation 3 using the nearly identical text. The NCAA also has an official interpretation that only differs in that it calls for the ejection of the head coach in addition to the runners involved.

Apparently at one time this bit of chicanery was a thing.

[Tborze]

2 hours ago, Jimurray said:

I think we had some posts on U-E before this ruling came out where the consensus was to punish cheating and enforcing passing and reverse running was espoused by most. But, while I do check runners returning to proper bases as BU, I haven’t checked proper runners on the proper bases. Has the OP ever been an actual occurrence?

I’ve been watching for correct runners ever since that post lol

I believe it was about to happen one time, the coach looked at me as I was watching him.  I think he changed his mind after seeing me.  
 

Maybe it was my dead stare as I was licking my chops.

[BigBlue4u]

That's a good idea to wait for the ball to become live.  As stated by others, I would call an out for passing a runner and eject both runners.  I would also eject the coach for not controlling his team.  This type of blatant cheating has to be stopped and the way to do it is to provide severe consequences.  In California, there is a provision in high school games for ejecting a runner who clearly cuts short of third base to score a run.

[SeeingEyeDog]

9 hours ago, Jimurray said:

Has the OP ever been an actual occurrence?

No, I have not...this was purely a hypothetical. I have of course read the rule about "reverse running" and just could not put together how, when or why someone would do this but, I kept thinking on it because everything that exists in any rulebook is there because that thing it's preventing happened. So, I reverse engineered how that rule could be applied...maybe? And then parallel parked my way into that 2018 Case Book situation. Thank you again for posting it.

Of greater concern, it occurred to me I had not been auditing runners back to bases after these kinds of breaks in play. It's always good to close that loop hole on my own, rather than have The Game brutally do it for me...

~Dawg