Yesterday, high school play in game. We are utilizing DP/Flex.
Second inning, our right fielder becomes ill. We tell the ump we are going to sub for her, but will send our DP out to play in her spot defensively. He says if we do this we will "lose our flex". I ask "Why would we lose our flex? This has nothing to do with our flex? She will still be out there on defense."
He tells me "DP is an OFFENSIVE player. If you put her out there on defense, that is a substitution."
I respond "No, the DP can play any defensive position other than for the flex and it's just a defensive rotation, not a substitution."
At this point he starts being half an rear, "How can it be a defensive rotation when she's on your bench? That would mean you have ten defenders! You show me where you have ten defensive positions out there!"
Now I'm completely and not believing what I'm hearing from this gray-haired ump who I know has umped for years. I try one more time "We don't have 10 defensive positions out there, but the DP is available to play defense as long as it's not for the flex!" He looks at me like I've just spoken heresy. The inning is getting ready to start and I'm not getting anywhere, so I go sit down with my rule book.
Next inning break, based on his statement "Show me where..." I read him the rule that says the DP can "replace anyone on defense any number of times yadda yadda yadda". Now he's a full on rear and tells me "YES THE DP CAN PLAY DEFENSE... AS A SUBSTITUTE! DP IS AN OFFENSIVE POSITION! NOW GO SIT DOWN!"
I SERIOUSLY debated getting tossed at that point, but it was early in an important game so I didn't want to go there even though I felt this was CLEARLY a misapplication of the rules. How would you have handled this? Is this a protestable position?
Second inning, our right fielder becomes ill. We tell the ump we are going to sub for her, but will send our DP out to play in her spot defensively. He says if we do this we will "lose our flex". I ask "Why would we lose our flex? This has nothing to do with our flex? She will still be out there on defense."
He tells me "DP is an OFFENSIVE player. If you put her out there on defense, that is a substitution."
I respond "No, the DP can play any defensive position other than for the flex and it's just a defensive rotation, not a substitution."
At this point he starts being half an rear, "How can it be a defensive rotation when she's on your bench? That would mean you have ten defenders! You show me where you have ten defensive positions out there!"
Now I'm completely and not believing what I'm hearing from this gray-haired ump who I know has umped for years. I try one more time "We don't have 10 defensive positions out there, but the DP is available to play defense as long as it's not for the flex!" He looks at me like I've just spoken heresy. The inning is getting ready to start and I'm not getting anywhere, so I go sit down with my rule book.
Next inning break, based on his statement "Show me where..." I read him the rule that says the DP can "replace anyone on defense any number of times yadda yadda yadda". Now he's a full on rear and tells me "YES THE DP CAN PLAY DEFENSE... AS A SUBSTITUTE! DP IS AN OFFENSIVE POSITION! NOW GO SIT DOWN!"
I SERIOUSLY debated getting tossed at that point, but it was early in an important game so I didn't want to go there even though I felt this was CLEARLY a misapplication of the rules. How would you have handled this? Is this a protestable position?
Last edited: