Jump to content

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member

Recommended Posts

Play:  0-2 count on batter.  Pitch is thrown 59-feet.  Regardless, batter swings and completely misses.  The pitch, after bouncing in the dirt, then strikes the batter in the shin.  What is the ruling in FED?  I would appreciate any cite you can provide.

i can think of two possible answers:  (a) strike three, ball is dead, batter is out; (b) strike three, ball is dead, batter awarded first base due to uncaught third strike.  Other runners return to TOP base unless forced to advance by batter.

I am wondering if there has ever been an official FED discussion of this play.  If not, has any other source discussed it?  I know some of you have Casebooks going back decades.

 

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member

Answer (a) is correct. This case is probably sufficient, even though it doesn't address it directly.

Quote

8.1.1 SITUATION D: When may a batter be hit by a pitch and not be awarded first base?

RULING: (a) When the pitch is a strike; (b) when the batter permits the ball to touch him; (c) with no runners on base, the pitch is illegal and is not ball four or (d) when the batter attempts to hit the pitch.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, lawump said:

Play:  0-2 count on batter.  Pitch is thrown 59-feet.  Regardless, batter swings and completely misses.  The pitch, after bouncing in the dirt, then strikes the batter in the shin.  What is the ruling in FED?  I would appreciate any cite you can provide.

i can think of two possible answers:  (a) strike three, ball is dead, batter is out; (b) strike three, ball is dead, batter awarded first base due to uncaught third strike.  Other runners return to TOP base unless forced to advance by batter.

I am wondering if there has ever been an official FED discussion of this play.  If not, has any other source discussed it?  I know some of you have Casebooks going back decades.

 

Thanks!

Regarding the idea of an uncaught third strike, why would the ball bouncing be different than any other pitch hitting the batter when he swings?  F2's rarely catch a pitch that hits the batter and we know that the pitch bouncing first makes no difference.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, lawump said:

Play:  0-2 count on batter.  Pitch is thrown 59-feet.  Regardless, batter swings and completely misses.  The pitch, after bouncing in the dirt, then strikes the batter in the shin.  What is the ruling in FED?  I would appreciate any cite you can provide.

i can think of two possible answers:  (a) strike three, ball is dead, batter is out; (b) strike three, ball is dead, batter awarded first base due to uncaught third strike.  Other runners return to TOP base unless forced to advance by batter.

I am wondering if there has ever been an official FED discussion of this play.  If not, has any other source discussed it?  I know some of you have Casebooks going back decades.

 

Thanks!

It's clearly A.

 

But, I don't have my library of case books handy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, grayhawk said:

Regarding the idea of an uncaught third strike, why would the ball bouncing be different than any other pitch hitting the batter when he swings?  F2's rarely catch a pitch that hits the batter and we know that the pitch bouncing first makes no difference.

I agree entirely with your rationale.  The argument taking place is that because it is strike three, that bounced first, it is an uncaught third strike and batter gets first base.

I'm not saying that I agree with their argument; I'm just telling you the argument that is being sent my way.  I'm looking for an official cite to refute it.  I tried to remain neutral in my original post since others in the argument read these boards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, lawump said:

I agree entirely with your rationale.  The argument taking place is that because it is strike three, that bounced first, it is an uncaught third strike and batter gets first base.

I'm not saying that I agree with their argument; I'm just telling you the argument that is being sent my way.  I'm looking for an official cite to refute it.  I tried to remain neutral in my original post since others in the argument read these boards.

Any time the ball hits the batter it's dead. There is then no pitch to be caught or uncaught.

Maven posted the FED case

And also in OBR:  Batter gets first  Rule 5.05(b) (2) He is touched by a pitched ball which he is not attempting to hit

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FED Rule 5 ART. 1 . . . Ball becomes dead immediately when:

a. a pitch touches a batter or his clothing (8-1-1d), a runner (8-3-1a);

1. The ball becomes dead even though the batter strikes at it (8-1-1d).

FED Rule 8-1 ART. 1 . . . A batter becomes a runner with the right to attempt to score by advancing to first, second, third and home bases in the listed order when:

d. a pitched ball hits his person or clothing, provided he does not strike at the ball; or 1. If he permits the pitched ball to touch him (7-3-4), or if the umpire calls the pitched ball a strike, the hitting of the batter is disregarded except that the ball is dead. It is a strike or ball depending on location of the pitch.

FED Case Book play 5.1.1 Situation E:  On the third strike, B3 swings at and misses a pitch. The ball touches his arm or person. Ruling:  B3 is out. The ball becomes dead immediately. (5-1-1a, 8-1-1d)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/12/2018 at 2:01 PM, lawump said:

(b) strike three, ball is dead, batter awarded first base due to uncaught third strike.  Other runners return to TOP base unless forced to advance by batter.

That's a call your partner makes when the game takes a sharp turn towards Guanoville.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/12/2018 at 2:24 PM, grayhawk said:

Regarding the idea of an uncaught third strike, why would the ball bouncing be different than any other pitch hitting the batter when he swings?  F2's rarely catch a pitch that hits the batter and we know that the pitch bouncing first makes no difference.

Usually it's the umpire who catches the ball after it deflects off the batter.  Those hurt.  Happened to me yesterday.  Love the catcher saying, don't worry, I got you covered.  I'm not worried about the catcher. It's the pitcher and his  57 feet fastball I worry about.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/13/2018 at 9:02 AM, lawump said:

I agree entirely with your rationale.  The argument taking place is that because it is strike three, that bounced first, it is an uncaught third strike and batter gets first base.

I'm not saying that I agree with their argument; I'm just telling you the argument that is being sent my way.  I'm looking for an official cite to refute it.  I tried to remain neutral in my original post since others in the argument read these boards.

Great - all they're doing is creating a world where you have to now determine if the pitch, after the swing and miss, hit the batter's toe first or the ground first, or *gasp* at the same time.

It is indeed uncaught, but it's still a "pitch" at the time it hits him, making it dead ball strike three.   

Even if one were to rule the batter gets first, it would be him getting hit by the ball at some point after the pitch is no longer a pitch (hits catcher, hits ump, passes catcher?, whatever the standard is) - and even then, it's just a ball that hit the B/R unintentionally and it's live, is it not...not an automatic granting of first base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/13/2018 at 8:02 AM, lawump said:

I agree entirely with your rationale.  The argument taking place is that because it is strike three, that bounced first, it is an uncaught third strike and batter gets first base.

I'm not saying that I agree with their argument; I'm just telling you the argument that is being sent my way.  I'm looking for an official cite to refute it.  I tried to remain neutral in my original post since others in the argument read these boards.

But just because it bounces doesn't mean it is uncaught. I believe @maven answered a question simular to this in another part of the forum regarding a bounced pitch and a caught foul tip (yes yes I know what I just said).

In this case, even though the pitch bounced on the way to the plate, we still count it as a foul tip and a strike to the batter.

To paraphrase Maven again... "the only thing a bounced can't be is a called strike."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, BT_Blue said:

But just because it bounces doesn't mean it is uncaught. I believe @maven answered a question simular to this in another part of the forum regarding a bounced pitch and a caught foul tip (yes yes I know what I just said).

In this case, even though the pitch bounced on the way to the plate, we still count it as a foul tip and a strike to the batter.

To paraphrase Maven again... "the only thing a bounced can't be is a called strike."

 A foul tip is not a pitch. It is a batted ball. That's the distinction that allows it to be ruled a strikeout even if the ball bounces before it is batted. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's take the lunatic's approach to this...

If the batter was to be entitled to or awarded first base (which is implied by @lawump relaying that "batter gets first base" in the opinion of the lunatics dissenting group) for being touched by an uncaught third strike pitch, then we, in the 100+ years of baseball, would have had a lot more occurrences of it happening. You would have guys swinging at un-hittable pitches (ie. bouncing betties) with an 0-2 count and sticking a foot or leg out just to be contacted by the pitch and get awarded first base out of it!

As it is, we as umpires – with the rules backing us up, of course – may judge that a batter must make a reasonable attempt to avoid being touched by a pitch. If the pitch touches the batter, and we feel that he either didn't attempt to avoid, or intentionally stepped into it, we can keep him in the box to continue batting (the ball is dead, of course). If the pitch was in the zone, or was to be a strike, then it would be a strike charged to the batter. If it was strike three, the batter would be Out.

Additionally, if the batter was judged to have been swinging / attempting to hit the ball when he was touched by the pitch, this attempt would supersede this, and it would be ruled accordingly (as a strike).

Notice, in all these cases, whether or not the F2 catches the ball is irrelevant. As soon as the pitch touches the batter, the ball is dead. Period. Full stop. The swing / attempt-to-hit is at the top of the logic tree, followed closely by the ball touching the batter, thus becoming a Dead ball.

Let's take this a step further. Let's take the "bounce" out of it... X-2 count, direct pitch, up and in, batter swings (doesn't make contact) but the pitch touches him / glances off him and deflects to the backstop. Is that not, too, an Uncaught 3rd Strike?
Leave that facetious question hanging there, and attach this question – X-2 count, pitch bounces in front of the plate and up to make (obvious) contact with the bat, deflecting off into foul territory. Is this not a Foul?
Leave that facetious question hanging there, too, and attach this question – X-2 count, pitch bounces in front of plate and up to make (obvious) contact with the bat, deflecting into Fair territory. Is this not a Live ball?
Leave that facetious question hanging there, too, and let's add in this twist – X-2 count, pitch bounces in front of plate and up to make (obvious) contact with the bat, popping up (rather high) in the air, such that either the F1, F2, F3 or F5 all have an opportunity to, and do, make a catch. Is this not an Out?

On each of those questions wherein the ball makes contact with the bat, the status of the ball is altered from Pitch to Batted Ball, subject to being judged as Fair / Foul, Catch / No Catch, etc. In each of those questions, the number of times the pitch bounces – if at all – doesn't matter. So to wit, an incoming pitch – direct or bouncing – has its status altered when it touches a batter from Live to Dead. The bouncing doesn't matter. The only thing that supersedes this touch from being a HBP and a potential award of 1B is a swing (attempt) by the Batter.

 

PS: @Matt is completely on the right track, and I took inspiration from his answer in how a pitch has its status altered once it makes contact with A) the bat or B) the batter. Once the pitch makes contact with the bat, no matter how many times it bounces prior to that contact with the bat, if it goes "sharp and direct" to the glove or hand of the catcher first, and then secured, it qualifies as a Foul Tip (and the ball remains live, and considered as a Caught third strike if that be the case).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×