Question about the Padres suspended game
- Thread starter msstate7
- Start date
I brought back Big Johnson to your mom's house last night
https://baseballrulesacademy.com/official-rule/mlb/7-02-suspended-postponed-and-tie-games/
"A player who was not with the Club when the game was suspended may be used as a substitute, even if he has taken the place of a player no longer with the Club who would not have been eligible because he had been removed from the lineup before the game was suspended."
So anyone who didn't play in the game is eligible to play in the game, even if they are recent acquisitions.
"A player who was not with the Club when the game was suspended may be used as a substitute, even if he has taken the place of a player no longer with the Club who would not have been eligible because he had been removed from the lineup before the game was suspended."
So anyone who didn't play in the game is eligible to play in the game, even if they are recent acquisitions.
NYCBrave
Well-known member
Right, I saw that article as well, but it unfortunately doesn't answer the unique situation presented here. If a player played in the game and was replaced during the game, and is no longer on the team, do you need to burn a bench player to fill that spot (essentially that player won't play in the game at all), and who gets to choose which player that would be. I'm not sure this scenario has ever happened in recent memory, so I'm sure that's why it's not covered in the rules.
Like for example. Almonte was a PH and removed from the game. Do we have to for example use someone like Adrianza to fill that spot? Otherwise both teams could be over roster limits. Both teams also have expanded rosters now, which wasn't the case when the game was originally played.
It literally addresses this exact scenario...and I quoted it. "A player who was not with the Club when the game was suspended (example: Joc) may be used as a substitute, even if he has taken the place of a player no longer with the Club (example: Almonte) who would not have been eligible because he had been removed from the lineup before the game was suspended."
Any newly acquired player can replace anyone used in that game if they are no longer on the roster. So the Braves take their current roster, set the lineup as it was, then plug new guys in place of guys no longer with the club. The Braves get to make the substitutions as they see fit.
NYCBrave
Well-known member
But no that's not what we are getting here. The question is are we REQUIRED to replace Almonte, who was already removed from the game, because he is no longer on the team. The above text is stating that a player who wasn't on the team when the game was played, can be used when the game is played. And we get that. The question is if we need to fill Almonte's spot with a player from the current roster and burn that player essentially. And further, who gets to choose who that player is.
I believe the scenario you are presenting above covers something like we can remove Heredia (who is still in the game) from the lineup, and replace him with Rosario (who wasn't on the roster at the time, but is now).
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
I am not seeing what you are seeing. To me the text quoted is saying exactly what you are asking. A player who wasn't on the team is eligible to play, even if that player is replacing a player who became ineligible due to something like pinch hitting.
what is the disconnect here. So Almonte is ineligible because he was used. ok. he is gone. now every player is available to us.. pretty simple. if you did not get used in the game, then you can play.
NYCBrave
Well-known member
Simply this, are we required to replace Almonte's spot in the game. Not sure how else to ask this. It was simply asked in the original post.
I think you're overthinking this.
As long as a player wasn't burned before the game was suspended, he can be substituted into the game no matter when he was acquired...for anyone at any time, just like any available sub. Anyone not used in the game already, and on the roster now, is eligible to play in the game. So this will result in a "refreshed" bench for both teams in a sense.
The point of this rule is clearly to address these exact scenarios in a way that's as least disruptive as possible.
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
right and we can replace him with anyone currently on the team who is not already ineligible to play.. ineligible = someone who played or is currently playing
NYCBrave
Well-known member
But once again, that doesn't answer the question. Almonte is out of the game already. Are we required to replace his spot with a player currently on the roster? Not asking if we are allowed or not. Asking if we are required to replace a player who was removed from the game and no longer on the roster, to put a player currently on the roster in that spot. Just answer yes or no please lol
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
NO.. Almonte is a ghost now. his ineligible spot is gone and no player has to take his ineligibility
McCann'sCans
Gwinnett Bound
No.
My question about the game is when do players need to be replaced. We have 2-3 players that started no longer on the roster. However we are currently batting. Can we PH anytime during the inning or do we need to state who the replacements are before the game resumes?
Southcack77
Well-known member
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
I would imagine if a player is actively in the game and he is no longer on the roster, his spot would need to be filled prior to resumption. So if (scared to use this guy again) Almonte was in RF and batting 7th.. Twit would have to pencil in Duvall as the new RF and batting 7th before the game resumes.
NYCBrave
Well-known member
It's not stated anywhere in the rules, so that's why this topic was started.
McCann'sCans
Gwinnett Bound
I believe the game resumes as a 7 inning game, correct? So we are starting bottom 5 with 2.5 innings remaining.
Pederson, Swanson, Freeman, Albies, Riley, *Vogt*, Heredia, *Arcia*, pitcher
With Vogt hurt and Arcia now in AAA, we can expect to see a lineup at resumption of:
Pederson
Swanson
Freeman
Albies
Riley
d'Arnaud/Contreras
Heredia
Duvall
We'll be starting at the top of the order, so I maybe leave Heredia in there to start in the field until his spot comes up, and then pinch hit Soler/Rosario. Could also consider pinch hitting Soler to start the 5th inning depending who is pitching for San Diego. Adrianza will be ineligible having already pinch hit. The Padres will start with Pham/Kim/Caratini in the top of the sixth, so potentially Jackson throws first for us? Alternatively, you could have Chavez start since he was in the game and his spot in the lineup was just cleared.
Pederson, Swanson, Freeman, Albies, Riley, *Vogt*, Heredia, *Arcia*, pitcher
With Vogt hurt and Arcia now in AAA, we can expect to see a lineup at resumption of:
Pederson
Swanson
Freeman
Albies
Riley
d'Arnaud/Contreras
Heredia
Duvall
We'll be starting at the top of the order, so I maybe leave Heredia in there to start in the field until his spot comes up, and then pinch hit Soler/Rosario. Could also consider pinch hitting Soler to start the 5th inning depending who is pitching for San Diego. Adrianza will be ineligible having already pinch hit. The Padres will start with Pham/Kim/Caratini in the top of the sixth, so potentially Jackson throws first for us? Alternatively, you could have Chavez start since he was in the game and his spot in the lineup was just cleared.