Jump to content
  • 0

Little batter catches pitch


Guest Phillip
Umpire-Empire locks topics which have not been active in the last year. The thread you are viewing hasn't been active in 2108 days so you will not be able to post. We do recommend you starting a new topic to find out what's new in the world of umpiring.

Question

Guest Phillip

In a little league game if a right handed batter reaches for and catches a pitch thrown behind him with his left hand (not in self defense) should the batter be out or awarded 1st base for being hit by the pitch?  I seen this happen tonight and the batter was awarded 1st ... I don't necessarily agree with the call as the batter would not have been hit had he not initiated contact by catching the ball.
Any clarification would be appreciated.

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 2
8 minutes ago, Guest Phillip said:

In a little league game if a right handed batter reaches for and catches a pitch thrown behind him with his left hand (not in self defense) should the batter be out or awarded 1st base for being hit by the pitch?  I seen this happen tonight and the batter was awarded 1st ... I don't necessarily agree with the call as the batter would not have been hit had he not initiated contact by catching the ball.
Any clarification would be appreciated.

Thanks

"Time"   (Ball is always dead when a pitch touches a batter)

"Ball"  (Call the pitch)

"Stay right here batter"  (Didn't try to avoid - blatantly)

"Don't do that again"

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
25 minutes ago, Guest Phillip said:

should the batter be out or awarded 1st base for being hit by the pitch?

I endorse Coach's answer. By not attempting to avoid the pitch, instead actively catching it, the ball should still be called Dead ("Time!"), and the Batter remains at bat with a Ball registered in the count.

Normally, I would just upvote the proper answer (In this case, @Rich Ives's) and move on... but this option was a bit disturbing. Why would the batter be out???

We gotta start cutting off these myths where they crop up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
Guest Phillip

I thought he might be ruled out because it interfered with the play because runners were on base ... at least one would have scored on a wild pitch but he actually put the screws to his team by catching it but that's why I ask...I didn't know the rules on that.

Thanks for the input and much appreciated. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
7 hours ago, Guest Phillip said:

I thought he might be ruled out because it interfered with the play because runners were on base ... at least one would have scored on a wild pitch but he actually put the screws to his team by catching it but that's why I ask...I didn't know the rules on that.

Thanks for the input and much appreciated. 

That information would have been helpful in the original post to the context of your question.   Without that tidbit, your question is simply asking if a batter is out if he intentional gets hit by a pitch. 

Considering that he actually impeded his own team from scoring, and that he actually helped, not hindered, the defense by preventing the ball from going to the backstop, I have a hard time believing it would ever be called interference.   Interference/obstruction are about hindrance - if he didn't hinder the defense then you have your answer.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
Guest Phillip

I kinda feel like he should be out regardless ... he interfered with the flow of events for no apparent reason. I mean win or lose it just seems like there should be some type of penalty. But again, these are just my thoughts on a odd play. 

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
54 minutes ago, Guest Phillip said:

I kinda feel like he should be out regardless ... he interfered with the flow of events for no apparent reason. I mean win or lose it just seems like there should be some type of penalty. But again, these are just my thoughts on a odd play. 

Thanks

Penalty 1 - no runners advance, and nobody scores - which would have happened if he hadn't "interfered"

Penalty 2 - he doesn't get first base

Penalty 3 - umps, being human, will remember this douchebag move - the next time he gets hit by a pitch, or is involved in a close play...dollars to donuts the call doesn't go in his favor

 

There are many ways you can interfere with the play, with the flow of events, with the action...it only matters whether or not you hinder the other team.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
On 6/19/2018 at 5:19 PM, Guest Phillip said:

I kinda feel like he should be out regardless

And this is where your feelings don’t matter.

I’m saying this kindly and civilly, but bluntly and impersonal... feelings are not a part of baseball or its rules. By your expressed sentiments, you’re either a coach or a parent, probably with the opposing team. As umpires, we have to know the rules, the situations that they govern and apply to, and what impartial judgement we have to wield and implement within those rules.

There is no “well, he oughta be out!” for doing “this” or “that”. Either the rules outline that he is, or isn’t, out. In this case, he isn’t, or wouldn’t be, out.

Understand, too, the context of the game. It’s Little League. From my 26 years of baseball experience, Little League equates to little more than instructional ball (sectional / regional / national championship ball notwithstanding). If the Batter actually reached behind him to catch a pitch – in flight – then I can derive two things: A) the pitch wasn’t thrown that fast, hard, or accurately, and B) they’re of an age where runners on base, and advancing them with basestealing and errant pitches, really isn’t a priority. In fact, by omitting any baserunners aboard in the OP, the Batter may have done this with no runners on... in which case, it further strains the claim that “he should be out!... for something!”

Now, granted, by how the situation and the context is described, the umpire should not have awarded 1B. But, on that same vein, any time a batter is hit by a pitched ball, the ball is immediately dead, and any baserunners return to base occupied at TOP. In this case, it should have been called dead (“Time”), the Batter should be directed to stay (“Stay here”), a Ball added to the count (“Add a ball to the count”. If that’s Ball 4, then award a Walk), and the Batter admonished for pulling that stunt (“You can’t do that.”).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

He might not have been trying to be funny - young kids often put their hands up instinctively when a pitch is coming at them.

I would also say that unless the batter turned and lunged to catch a ball thrown well behind him, the umpire may have felt the batter was going to get hit, thus the HBP award. Picture a pitch that's going to miss the batter by 6 inches or even a foot, he puts his hand up and reaches a few inches to catch it. From the umpires perspective that's a pitch that might have hit the batter if he hadn't moved.

Even if he had moved back, as is often the first instinct for young players, and gotten hit in the arm he would get first, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
50 minutes ago, Rich Ives said:

It was a LL game. It wasn't any douchebag move - just a kid trying to be funny.

LL is an all encompassing term that includes "kids" up to 18 years old...I rarely assume we're always talking about the 12 years we see in the LLWS.

Being funny, being a smartass, and being a douchebag can often be interchangeable - especially depending on the mood of your audience.

9 minutes ago, isired said:

He might not have been trying to be funny - young kids often put their hands up instinctively when a pitch is coming at them.

I'm taking the OP at face value.  Right handed batter reached behind him and CAUGHT the pitch with his left hand..."not in self defense".

 

11 minutes ago, isired said:

Even if he had moved back, as is often the first instinct for young players, and gotten hit in the arm he would get first, right?

Jumping back into the pitch is a reactionary move, is understandable, and a lot more difficult to judge that it was done on purpose.  Reaching back to catch a pitch is a conscious effort and decision...and if you had time to make that decision, you had time to avoid being hit altogether.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
29 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

Reaching back to catch a pitch is a conscious effort and decision...and if you had time to make that decision, you had time to avoid being hit altogether.

Know where this comes from? When the kids play stickball / wiffle-ball. Batter just catches the lobbed-in “pitch”, tosses it back, and says, “C’mon Joey! Gimme something to hit!”

Go to any tournament or baseball event, you’re sure to find the little brothers and sisters, or, if the event involves 12U’s the players themselves when they’re in idle time, engrossed in a game of stickball / wiffle-ball. They’re happy as can be! Most of these kids all know each other anyway. We adults ruin everything with formal rules, keeping score, and pitch counts.

47 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

I rarely assume we're always talking about the 12 years we see in the LLWS.

Huh. From my experience, I now always assume “Little League” to be 12-or-less in age, especially when I see it on my potential game postings. Sure, there’s LL-Juniors and Seniors, but even that’s not real baseball. Most of the older kid baseball is under different “titles” like Babe Ruth and Connie Mack.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
12 minutes ago, MadMax said:

Huh. From my experience, I now always assume “Little League” to be 12-or-less in age, especially when I see it on my potential game postings. Sure, there’s LL-Juniors and Seniors, but even that’s not real baseball.

while LLI encompasses 5-18 yo, I'd agree Little League is generally 12 and younger, however, Jrs+ I beg to differ, is real baseball, now maybe the level is not as high as it once was due to travel/showcase ball draining the pool, however, it's played very much like the MLB (in my experience) but for the pitch counts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
22 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

LL is an all encompassing term that includes "kids" up to 18 years old...I rarely assume we're always talking about the 12 years we see in the LLWS.

 

Little League is majors and below.

Intermediate Division of LL is the 50-70 game

Junior League is 13-14

Senior League is 15-16

Big League 16-18 was discontinued. Those kids go elsewhere now.

Most people use the correct terminology when discussing them.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...