- This topic has 6 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 2 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Ok, here goes:
Rule #1 – If the manager or pitching coach makes two trips to the mound the pitcher has to be removed.
Rule #2 – The relief pitcher has to pitch to three batters.So, the manager brings in a reliever. He gets the first guy out and then the manager makes another trip to the mound to go over the scouting report. This would be his 1st visit to the new relief pitcher.
The relief pitcher then allows a single to the next hitter. So then the manager makes his 2nd trip to the mound to go over the scouting report on the next hitter.
But, since it’s the managers 2nd trip to the mound he has to remove the pitcher. But the pitcher has not faced three batters yet.
So……what happens???
I would imagine the pitcher has to be removed in that scenario. I am not saying that with 100% certaintude but that would be the logical conclusion because the 3 batter rule doesn’t supercede all of the other rules. For instance if a relief pitcher comes into the game with two outs and retires the batter for the third out he does not have to come back out to the mound the next inning and face two more batters.
Of course it could also be that the umpire wouldn’t allow the manager to make the second mound visit until the pitcher had faced three hitters. Not sure.
I do not think the second mound visit would be allowed by the home plate ump because the pitcher has not faced three batters or the inning ended. So the pitcher would remain in the game and the manager would be sent back to the dugout. Otherwise, everyone would use multiple visits to circumvent the three-batter rule and it could easily be gamed.
Confirmed by MLB Rule 5.10.m.4
Enforcement of Mound Visit Limits. A manager or coach who crosses the foul line on his way to the mound after his team has exhausted its mound visits must make a pitching change, unless the pitcher has not pitched to a minimum of three consecutive batters in accordance with Rule 5.10(g), in which case the pitcher shall continue to pitch only to complete pitching to his first three consecutive batters (or the end of the inning, whichever comes first) in accordance with Rule 5.10(g). If a manager or coach believes an exception to the mound visit rule applies, he must confer with the umpire prior to crossing the foul line. In circumstances in which a team is forced to make an unintended pitching change by operation of this Rule, and there is no relief pitcher warming up in the bullpen, the manager or coach who violated the Rule by exceeding his team’s allotted number of mound visits shall be subject to ejection from the game. The umpire may allow the substitute pitcher additional time to prepare to enter the game.
Obviously, the threat of ejection from the game is the most effective way to enforce the rule. Otherwise, the rule carries zero weight and the manager has no reason to fear crossing the foul line. I guess they could also enforce it by other means such as the threat of awarding a base or a ball in the count, but threat of ejection pretty much eliminates any possibility of a manager resorting to an Earl Weaver or Billy Martin type tactical ploy. Sometimes sanity has to prevail in order to ensure the survival and existence of a civilized community…Haha!
This discussion makes me think of another scenario that has crossed my mind a few times before. Say a manager wanted to take his reliever out after one or two batters, so he gives him the wink. At that point the reliever claims he suddenly has acute arm pain or some other fabrication that would be hard to disprove on the spot. How do the umps handle that one?
We do know based on recent happenings that teams will cheat and it should be prevented. It would also be a terrible look for MLB if the next day the medical professionals say the guy’s arm is destroyed, his career is probably over, and the additional 15 pitches he had to throw after the injury likely contributed to it all. Lawsuits are fun.
Of course this would never happen, but I never say never, lol.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.