All Activity

My question is: How many of you are actually seeing batter's boxes 6 inches off the plate regularly?! If you are, let me add a "frame of reference" . . . The batter has his toe on the inside of batter's box line. The line is 2 1/2" wide. It is 6 inches to the plate. The plate is 17" wide. It is 6" to the other batter's box. That line is 2 1/2" wide. If you are calling a strike on the opposite batter's box line, you are calling a strike almost a yard away from the batter. Kid better grab a longer bat or bring his meterstick next time.

In my cases, the coach made it known. Twice I have had a coach answer the phone in the box. Twice I have had a base coach give himself up. The first asked me what happened (his batter struck out). The second asked me the count. Both told me they were texting and not watching. I get what you are saying about being sure. However confusing GameChanger can be, it isn't so interesting that it looks the same as checking your DMs or swiping right on your dating app of choice.

We can call "Infield fly, if fair!" We cannot call "TIME! Interference if fair!" You know that we cannot determine where the ball ultimately goes and if the interference affected/changed the play. That determination has already been made the moment we do or do not call "TIME!" The moment the interference occurs, the ball is dead OR the moment the non-interference occurs and we do not kill it, we have already determined there was no play to be made (whether that is due to a foul ball or simply "no, the fielder wasn't getting there"). Nothing else exists after that moment for that call. Maybe I am missing something (and I did misread your post initially and thought you said you saw it bounce), but I don't understand why discussion of a foul ball was even introduced. Let's run with it, though. Let's say it is not a ball clearly headed foul, but rather a ball practicing drunken monkey kung fu as it heads up the line. Again, we cannot wait to see what happens. At the moment the batter-runner "causes an incident" we have to either: (A) stop it all right there and make a call based on the ball's position (fair or foul) at that moment; OR (B) adjudicate there is no interference and allow it to play out. Waiting to see and then adjudicating is not an option (even if it is prudent). The softball change brought up by @Velho was made as an effort to rectify this created conundrum on foul fly balls (why would we call the batter out when the worst thing that would have happened is a foul ball?). I will give the softball world their due: they try to fix these problems while baseball culture (read: rules writers) largely tries to pretend they will just go away. You know I 100% agree with putting an end to the antics that we contort ourselves into allowing.

Yes, well, I'll try. I am probably going to do a poor job. It is something that typically has no support in the rules, but we would dub it a "don't do that." An offending action that the umpire does not dub illegal, but is rewarding "bad" behavior. A great example would be the College Softball World Series a few years ago: runner slides safely into second base and the play is over/relaxed. As a player goes to throw the ball back in, the runner inadvertently waves her arms, and deflects the throw. The ball careens off her hand, and she advances to third. CCS even covered it with a similar thought (there is no intermediary step): I see this play in the same vein. You don't have a play, so you can't have interference, but . . . the illicit act creates an opportunity for the offender to benefit with no recourse for the aggrieved team. I feel plays like these should be like the batter-runner picking up an errant ball four while no runners are trying to advance. We are killing it and not allowing anybody to advance. If it would have been interference during a play, why are we allowing it to create a play when there wasn't one?

It will fail, at least momentarily at some point. Also, when you roll it a ball but call a strike and the board shows you ignoring it or rolling all the way around to correct it... oh boy...

Only if through or by a fielder. Getting hit by a batted ball that the runner had no reason to expect the defense to field is still an out.

I recall (but maybe imagined that) exact reference. Other than the softball above, the only thing I'm able to find is in regards to a bunted ball: 7-11-o "After hitting or bunting a foul ball, the batter-runner intentionally deflects the course of the ball that has a chance of becoming fair" Is there another cite I'm missing?

added dimension: is the strike zone a D, 🛑, or 🟦 shape

I understand your thinking. But let's look at it from another perspective. How can you be sure what the coach is doing? In this situation, the umpire is going to get the dirty end of the stick if he accuses the coach of violating the rule without positive proof. If the umpire has positive proof, then, by all means, enforce the rule as written.

1. All Star Colbolt F3 or the Adams XV with an F3 harness 2. F3 shins. 14”. Nothing else works as well for me. 3. All Star FM4000MAG or Nike Icon with TW pads. 4. All Star Scully. Just started using it but I like it. 5. All Star cast 4 dial Indicator. Also functions as self defense tool. 6. Mizuno Plate shoes. Reebok FMs were the best. Why couldn’t Simittys copied these? 7. Jordan’s if the field is clean. 8. Diamond MMA or Nutty Buddy. I switch. I trust both. 9. EBags Mother Lode. 10. Oakley Flak Jacket XLJ with the field lenses I have all of the above (and more) as I am very fortunate. Admittedly have not dipped my toe into the newest GD gear. Missed out on the last custom Kuta. Waiting for the next release. I really feel we are in the golden age of equipment. We have a lot of options that we didn’t used to have.

We can argue all day about the strike zone. The most important element is, is the umpire consistent? Batters can adjust if an umpire is consistent. If the umpire is not consistent, then it's everyone for himself.

Unless I missed it, nobody has asked the most important question: Did a fielder have a reasonable chance to field the batted ball. Yes, runner is out. No. Then the ball is live and in play.

I figure this is coming at some point. I can’t imagine it’s that hard re:technology. Plate meeting we get handed an indicator that controls the board. Seems like everyone would be a fan of it.

Yes, sir. I was merely citing the speaker (singer?) of the words.

I want inside pitches that are not breaking balls to be closer to the plate.

So ... I'm posing some questions because there is very little consensus of how terms are used such as: ... Strike Zone ... Corner ... River ... White line ... Paint I call a lot of travel ball at a high level (PBR) and unless we are calling the top of the top level, we call strikes for pitches that are up to but not touching the white lines (batter's boxes). For those counting at home, that is a precise width of 29". River (6") + plate (17") + River (6"). If you call just the plate, just the WHITE, and you call a strike for anything "painting" the white, that's a width of about 23" outside to outside of the ball. If you use the black, add 2 inches. When a batter asks, "Blue, was that the corner?" I am saying YES if the outside of the ball was painting the batter's box. When a batter asks if that painted the zone, I only say yes if it painted the plate. I would appreciate any discussions on the true width of zones you call. Even for Varsity HS, I would guess my zone is 27" wide from outside to outside of the ball. This came from a widely shared video produced by FED.

So ... I'm posing some questions because there is very little consensus of how terms are used such as: ... Strike Zone ... Corner ... River ... White line ... Paint I call a lot of travel ball at a high level (PBR) and unless we are calling the top of the top level, we call strikes for pitches that are up to but not touching the white lines (batter's boxes). For those counting at home, that is a precise width of 29". River (6") + plate (17") + River (6"). If you call just the plate, just the WHITE, and you call a strike for anything "painting" the white, that's a width of about 23" outside to outside of the ball. If you use the black, add 2 inches. When a batter asks, "Blue, was that the corner?" I am saying YES if the outside of the ball was painting the batter's box. When a batter asks if that painted the zone, I only say yes if it painted the plate. I would appreciate any discussions on the true width of zones you call. Even for Varsity HS, I would guess my zone is 27" wide from outside to outside of the ball. This came from a widely shared video produced by FED.

I'm shocked @Richvee didn't catch this before me. Neil Peart wrote those words of wisdom.

Agreed. How often do we see 1bc / 3bc "filed" a foul ball? That's never called INT. I know NCAA used to have a rule that if the BR contacted a foul ball, he was out. They then changed it mabe 15 years a go to "the ball must have a chance to become fair." I don't think there's anything directly on this, but if there's no play, there's no interference.

Do we have anything in baseball like the below from USA Softball Rulebook? 33-A "If, in the judgment of the umpire, the foul fly ball could not have been caught with ordinary effort, a strike is called, the ball is dead, and the batter remains at bat." 33-D " If interference occurs by the runner on a foul fly ball not caught but, in the umpire’s judgment, could have been caught with ordinary effort had interference not occurred, the runner is out and the batter is also out. If, in the judgment of the umpire, the foul fly ball could not have been caught with ordinary effort, a strike is called, the ball is dead, and the batter remains at bat."

Here's the thing, @The Man in Blue... on this play in the original post, there's INT. The Batter popped the ball into the air, and hindered – whether intentional or not, in this case, is irrelevant... in this case – the fielder's attempt to catch it. There. Call INT, Batter is out, move on to the next. Done. On the proposed variation of play, in which the batted ball hits the ground, is where I interject my skepticism, cynicism, and criticism (yup! All three -isms!). My issue isn't with the rule per se, it's with the imperative – "We must call INT...". If a batted ball is obviously foul, and the BR sprints out of the box, up the line, and contacts the F1 who's reactively headed towards that batted (foul) ball, are we calling OBS and awarding BR 1B?? In that same vein, say we have a batted ball that is headed towards and ultimately into the stands... are we calling INT on the 1BC for contacting / impeding the F3 at the moment the ball left the bat? No, that would be absurd. We observe INT occurring, and we apply the penalty if warranted, but we – here's the big part – determine where the ball ultimately goes, and if the INT affected / changed that outcome. If we didn't do this, then that incentivizes one of the two parties to engage in these... contestations... so as to draw a call. If the imperative exists, then you better believe that a F1 will "steer towards" a BR on any batted (ground) ball in the vicinity of home plate or up the 1BL, regardless of it being Fair or Foul. We see eerily similar antics with Runners steering / going out of their way so as to draw an OBS call (typically during a rundown). So, on this proposed play, I've got this ball going definitely Foul. And in my judgement, that outcome is unaffected by any/the contact that occurred between BR and F5. I completely agree, that if the batted ball's status is still undeterminable – ie. "maybe" – with a chance of being / ending Fair, and the ("protected") fielder has that opportunity to make it Fair, we should call and apply INT.

Geddy Lee, 1980

@dumbdumb, we should know by now that the Professional game (uppercase P) is an entirely different environment and set of protocols, expectations, and morés than most of us will ever experience.

Can you expand on this? Not sure I follow.

Need to add Belt- Pioneer Belt, patent or regular, gold or silver buckle. They make their belts with the holes in 1/2" increments so those hot days you can tighten it in the later innings, and if you are bundled up with multiple garments tucked in you can let it out a half. lifetime warranty (and we KNOW umpires like wearing the same thing for a lifetime!! 😄). Family owned company. USA made. Get one, you wont be disappointed.