Talk:Batting out of turn

References Needed for Further Verification

The article is quite long and the majority of the subsections do not have any in-line citations. The article would benefit from additional references, namely ones that verify information in the article. I thus added the ref:improve template. (Belshay (talk) 17:42, 6 March 2016 (UTC))

Thanks for that article. I am just wondering about one thing though: If two batters basically switch their position in the order and the defense fails to call out the first one prior to the first pitch, but then realizes that the second batter is out of order, wouldn't it make more sense to wait until he completes his at-bat before calling the Umps attention to it? As I understand your examples, the out is recorded and his at-bat is nullified no matter what. If they call it during the at bat, the batter in order gets a chance to produce? What if the ump is notified of the first batter being out of order during the at bat, is the real batter allowed to complete the at-bat? Thanks! [[User:Yardcock|Yardcock | talk]] 20:37, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

Good questions! If your first priority is good will and good sportsmanship, the defense should notify the umpire immediately when they discover any potential BOOT situation. If it is in the middle of the at-bat of an improper batter, then the proper batter will take his place without penalty. However, if the defense's priority is to get batters out, then you would want to wait in some situations. If a batter is currently improper, the defense may wish to wait and see what happens--if an improper batter reaches base, they will then notify the umpire (before another pitch is thrown). The umpire will then nullify the batter's action, call the proper batter out, thus the defense gains an out! Smart play but pretty sneaky. I wouldn't recommend it at the youth level. If an improper batter makes an out, the defense may wish to ignore it in the hopes that they may reproduces their mistake later in the game.

In response to your last question, yes, I think the article makes it clear that the proper batter can come to the plate at anytime during the at bat without penalty. --Locarno 21:44, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. Looks to me though that it is a lot more sneaky to wait and see if the opponent does it again and then use it to your advantage ;). I have never seen this, how often does it actually happen? [[User:Yardcock|Yardcock | talk]] 22:25, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)

I have never seen this occur in Major League Baseball, but I've read about it:

[1]

[2]

[3]

In umpiring youth and High School games, I have enforced it a few times.

--Locarno 13:17, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

It happened in a game yesterday (9/1/07) between Seattle and Toronto. Correct order was Hill, Overbay, Zahn, but Overbay batted before Hill and made an out. Hill then doubled but Seattle manager appealed and the double was nullified.

However - Zahn then batted and from then on the correct sequence was used. But as I read the rule, Zahn should have been called out for not having batted in the proper order (after Overbay batted without any appeal Zahn then became the "proper batter"). So Zahn actually batted out of turn also. Also, Hill seems to have been credited with a time at bat in the official box score, when actually Zahn should have been (as I see it). Gr8white 23:57, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

The above is included in the "Retrosheet", which is noted further below. Based on what I see above, Overbay's out counted and Zahn became the proper batter (even though this would cause Hill to be skipped), so Hill's double was out of turn, and the appeal should have resulted in Zahn being out, Hill being removed from base, and the proper batter being the batter next after Zahn in the order. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 (talk) 14:33, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

It's not sneaky at all to refrain from pointing out BOOT situation. By rule, that applies to the umpires and the official scorers. And if you are on the defensive team (like manager), you probably want the improper batter to finish his plate appearance before making a decision about the BOOT situation, and if the improper batter makes an out with no run being scored, you probably want to say nothing. There was a 1967 situation (Pittsburgh Pirates vs. NY Mets) where 2 Pirate batters switched (adjacent) places in the order, and the Mets said nothing until, during the 2nd time through the Pirates' batting order, an improper batter doubled with 2 out, scoring 2 runs; then the Mets appealled, and the double and 2 runs were wiped out, killing the Pirates' rally. There is a "Retrosheet" site which lists batting-out-of-turn incidents in the major leagues. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 (talk) 14:26, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Double play

Article has "If batting out of turn is appealed, the entire play is nullified under Official Baseball Rule 6.07 and MiLB Umpire Manual 4.3." OK, and the article then says this could include double play, so I am pointing out that you'd probably want to let the double play stand even if it was improper batter who hit into it.

Although there is penalty for finishing out-of-turn appearance, you decline such penalty by REMAINING SILENT, in contrast to American football, where you have to say that a penalty is either accepted or declined. Carlm0404 (talk) 01:26, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

It's considered by some an unwritten rule that if you are the defense and realize that the batter is out of turn, don't say anything while that batter's plate appearance is still incomplete. (It may turn out that you let the result stand even with the batter being out of turn.) Yes, this situation is rare, compared to, say, having runner on 3rd base (unwritten rule is that he takes his lead in foul territory). Carlm0404 (talk) 03:38, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Title change?

Would "Batting out of order" work better as a title? It seems to me and others to be the common term, although checking the n-grams "Batting out of turn" has the historical edge (esp. 1938-1970) but now has only a slight, and falling, overall edge. I used 'Batting out of order' in adding this page to the {{Baseball}} navbox, seems the more familiar terminology. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:42, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

"Batting out of order" is the official terminology from the MLB rulebook, so if common usage trends towards this phrase, I think it is reasonable to use as the article title. isaacl (talk) 16:43, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure where you are seeing that. From what I can see, 6.03(b) from the 2021 rulebook is titled "Batting Out of Turn". The mlb.com glossary also calls it Batting Out of Turn. Skipple ☎ 20:16, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

My apologies; I was led astray by my failing memory and the index at the end of the rulebook, which indexes "Batting out of order". In that case, personally I think there should be evidence that "batting out of order" has clearly supplanted the previous common use of "batting out of turn" before renaming the article. isaacl (talk) 02:55, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Hm, on one hand, as noted, the official rule phrases it as "batting out of turn", on the other hand, it's called a batting order in general, and that's a far more commonly used term which likely influences the common speech. In terms of which is actually more used, the ngram is actually fairly inconclusive because it's such a small data set that minor variances are amplified. I think we be better if with "order" because of consistency than anything else. oknazevad (talk) 18:35, 14 January 2023 (UTC)