I posted this on the SDMB, but since a lot of our league members are not members there, I thought I'd post it here too. This is not a quiz where I have the answer... I don't know what the answer is and I'd love to hear what your opinion is (and, of course, why you have that opinion).
Scenario:
It's been a long, long day for the Knights and the Mammoths. For twenty innings, the two teams have been fighting tooth and nail. Over the last eleven innings, neither team has been able to squeeze a run across the plate to break the deadlock. Managers have used every available trick to gain the advantage. The Mammoths manager has not only used every bench player he has, but, in trying to gain the advantage several times in righty/lefty pitching situations, has exhausted every pitcher in the bullpen. He only has nine players left now -- the nine currently in the game. It's with these players that he will win or lose. There is no one else.
Fortunately, it may soon be over. It's the bottom of the 21st and the Mammoths have managed to load the bases with no one out. It looks like there is a good chance they'll actually be able to score and end the game. Up to the plate comes Andy Argumentative. The Knights pitcher works him to a full count. The next pitch just cuts the corner and the umpire calls Andy out. Andy, clearly upset, doesn't agree and lets the umpire know. Vociferously. The umpire warns him, but Andy is so worked up and so wants the game to end (with a victory, of course) that he continues arguing and kicks dirt on the umpire. Eventually he gets careless and accidentally kicks the umpire himself in the process. Having had enough, the umpire gives Andy the heave-ho.
Kris King, the Knights manager, immediately comes out of the dugout and tells the umpire that he has to call a forfeit -- as the Mammoths now only have eight players in the game, and there is no one left on the roster to replace Andy. He cites rule 7.03 (b).
A game shall be forfeited to the opposing team when a team is unable or refuses to place nine players on the field.
The Mammoths, he argues, are unable to put nine players on the field. Hence the game should be forfeit.
Max Maximus, the Mammoths manager comes out to dispute the point. He says that he's not required to put nine players on the field, at least not until the start of the next inning, or until Andy's spot in the lineup comes up again*. As proof, he points out that, were it only the fifth inning, he wouldn't be required to name a replacement for Andy until the next inning. So too, here, he shouldn't have to name a replacement (and forfeit) until he's required to.
The umpire ponders, considering both arguments. Which one is right?
Zev Steinhardt
* Which it can't anyway -- the game or inning will end before Andy's spot comes up again
(Note: This is not comparable to an injury situation. Let's say Andy broke his foot on that last strike. Andy is still, technically, in the game, even if he can't physically play and the manager would not have to replace him until the next inning. In this case, however, Andy is immediately out of the game.)
Interesting situation. I remember a Phillies game about 8 years ago where a near-similar situation ensued, but they only ran out of position players after Ryan Howard was ejected (Roy Oswalt, a SP, had to enter to play LF).
ReplyDeleteAnyway, my reading of 7.03 (b) is the same as Max Maximus': that the rule can't be invoked until the start of the next inning.
I agree with Michael - the replacement doesn't have to be named until the start of the next inning. Had he argued earlier in the count and been tossed before the end of his at-bat, then I think they'd have to forfeit.
ReplyDeletei agree the ruling should be with Max ..it clearly says take the field refer to defense ...i have a side note thou it seems that a rule change should be done 21st inning should allow that each team should be allowed to use a pitcher or batter to re-enter the game or suspend the game to he next day ...just a thought
ReplyDelete