This seems to be one of those rules that befuddle many (sadly, including some umpires).

 

I was reading a post on an umpire board that said this.

 

 

Lineup in order for Team A: Able, Baker, Charles, Daniels, etc.

 

Top of 1. First batter in the box is Baker. Baker grounds out. Now comes Able into the box.

 

Batting team scorekeeper starts yelling "Able, step out of the box. You shouldn't be up."

 

Manager of batting team comes out to talk to blue. Says "I think we screwed up." Blue then tells coach "Out stands. Baker's bat is skipped. Charles is now up." Coach doesn't like it.

 

What say you?

Able is out and Baker is returned to bat again. Correct?

Doesn't seem right to me. That's two at-bats for one.

Nku is right. Baker bats twice and Able is out

Able is out and Baker is returned to bat again. Correct?

 

Doesn't seem right to me. That's two at-bats for one.

 

Nku is right. Baker bats twice and Able is out

 

NKU is correct. The batter who was SUPPOSED to bat but did not is the one who is out. You then go to the official lineup card to see who is supposed to bat next after that batter. So Baker is next after Able on the card. He's up.

 

What if the error wasn't caught until a pitch was thrown to Able?

I should add that the first problem here is that the umpire called BOO without the defensive coach making the claim.

NKU is correct. The batter who was SUPPOSED to bat but did not is the one who is out. You then go to the official lineup card to see who is supposed to bat next after that batter. So Baker is next after Able on the card. He's up.

 

What if the error wasn't caught until a pitch was thrown to Able?

 

I may be wrong on this but...

 

A pitch to Able makes Baker's at bat legal. Now we go to the lineup card. Baker is supposed to be up but he's on base. His spot is skipped, and the next batter, Charlie, comes to bat, assuming the count.

NKU is correct. The batter who was SUPPOSED to bat but did not is the one who is out. You then go to the official lineup card to see who is supposed to bat next after that batter. So Baker is next after Able on the card. He's up.

 

What if the error wasn't caught until a pitch was thrown to Able?

 

You skip to Charlie I think...

I may be wrong on this but...

 

A pitch to Able makes Baker's at bat legal. Now we go to the lineup card. Baker is supposed to be up but he's on base. His spot is skipped, and the next batter, Charlie, comes to bat, assuming the count.

 

Correct.

 

What if we had same scenario but Able gets a single and BEFORE a pitch to the next batter the defense claims BOO?

I have witnessed a youth coach that knows this rule inside and out to his advantage and intentionally bat out of order. He has the rule bookmarked on his phone for immediate access when the umpire screws it up.

Correct.

 

What if we had same scenario but Able gets a single and BEFORE a pitch to the next batter the defense claims BOO?

 

To be clear, the scenario is:

 

Baker grounds out, Abel singles, protest?

To be clear, the scenario is:

 

Baker grounds out, Abel singles, protest?

 

If the above is the scenario, would the answer be: Baker's at bat was legalized by Abel taking a pitch. Abel's at bat is illegal (he's the 1 hitter, not 2) so therefore Abel is out and Charlie is at bat?

To be clear' date=' the scenario is: Baker grounds out, Abel singles, protest?[/quote']

 

 

Correct

I have witnessed a youth coach that knows this rule inside and out to his advantage and intentionally bat out of order. He has the rule bookmarked on his phone for immediate access when the umpire screws it up.

 

The only way you can get an advantage by batting out of order is if the opposing team doesn't catch it. Say the 9 hitter isn't very good and is almost a guaranteed out, or worse might hit into a double play. And your lead off guy is a stud. You intentionally send your lead off guy up and hope the other team doesn't catch it, that way you save an out. If the improper batter gets a hit, and the other team catches it before the next pitch, the proper batter gets called out, runners get returned to the base they were at at the time of the pitch, then the improper batter now bats again, and the batting team gains nothing. The reason the rules are so convoluted, is to prevent the hitting team from using the ploy as an advantage. However, many times batting out of order isn't caught at all or is caught to late, which legalizes whatever the improper batter did. Also since many umpires don't clearly know the rule, chances are it could work out for the batting team.

 

By the way, That's a pretty bush league move by a coach, especially in youth baseball.

Not disagreeing with your assessment of its usage and that is what he will do. Last batter gets skipped stud comes up. If he gets caught stud bats again. If he does not get caught then he skips his automatic out. This works better when batting roster and you are hitting eleven or twelve guys. Things get confusing when so many batters in line up.

 

Actually witnessed his stud get out once then he self reported it allowing his stud to bat again then he of course doubles in two runs.