Velho

fwiw, this would be disallowed in LL with the 2025 rules changes. Edit: banned as an "alterations to the bat". Done, I believe and knowing LL, in the name of safety.

Slightly too short a definition, imo. By that language, a pitcher who retrieves his own wild pitch and propels the ball anywhere would not be "throwing" it. Should read "secured by the defense".

What's the reason for the gamesmanship? I'm missing it. How does this help the defense win the game? Unless the entire point is to make PU look bad it?

Here is an unpaywalled article on ABS https://arizonasports.com/mlb/arizona-diamondbacks/mlb-to-test-abs-challenge-system-in-spring-training/3571431/ Major League Baseball will test out its Automated Ball-Strike (ABS) challenge system at various ballparks during spring training this year, the league announced earlier this offseason. Diamondbacks fans will watch more games with players challenging balls and strikes than any other fanbase, as The Athletic’s Evan Drellich reported on Friday that a league-leading 29 of Arizona’s spring training games will feature ABS. The challenge system uses Hawk-Eye cameras to track each pitch. Umpires still make all the calls, but teams will get two challenges for balls and strikes this spring training, according to Drellich. Clubs keep their challenge if successful. Half of the 10 Cactus League parks will feature ABS. Fans at Salt River Fields who attended the Spring Breakout prospect showcase last year had the chance to see ABS work in action, with players tapping their heads to challenge and the pitch location quickly showing up on the scoreboard in left field. Here’s what it looked like in a critical spot during a Triple-A game last year: https://x.com/MiLB/status/1836242412403867968 MLB started testing ABS full-time in Triple-A in the second half of last season, but the experiment dates back to minor league games in 2022. Many major league veterans, unless they went through a rehab assignment in minor league games, will have the chance to try it out for the first time. Many younger players and prospects have at least some familiarity with it. Testing out the challenge system in major league spring training is the biggest test yet for its potential future implementation in games that count. Perhaps the social media strike zone screenshot will soon go extinct.

Yep. "abandoning his effort to touch the next base" is the root of the rule. The run through, it could be argued, wasn't abandoning the effort to touch 3B but simply prioritizing getting to 2B itself over getting from 2B to 3B efficiently.

"No, no, no, Mr. umpire. He wasn't doing that horseSH*# run through trick. He's just got a wide turning radius. Look at him!"

How often was this called? I remember maybe once? "small tweak" huh, famous last words. It's not hard to see attempted extrapolation. It's a small ledge to grab onto and pull oneself up by on what was essentially a smooth surface previously since abandonment has rarely called historically.

Fixed for Texas. 😉 (you can see why they went there since they can't kill the rule entirely) This will quietly happen within 5 years at the MLB level. The expansion last year was a path to removing entirely since "it never gets violated".

That's how I see it: it's not explicitly covered and the closest by situation are U3K (INT and an out) or Runner INT with a thrown ball requiring intent (this isn't a thrown ball, it's a pitched ball which is treated differently in other rule applications). Both are imperfect, analogies can be drawn, and we're left searching for some foundational ethos to fall back on. Unfortunately there isn't one laid out in the rules. By that I mean no formal discussion of the "why" behind the rules (such as done in the US Constitution or Federalist papers - getting out over my skies there but directionally I think I'm right with the companions). Thus, we all have to do our own interpretation a'la J/R, Bruns, Wendelstedt, etc.

Point taken on "relative" (though via baseballsavant, I show 1,087 instances of balls to F1 where they may go to F3 in 2024 vs 1,150 instances of balls to F3 with a runner on 1B in 2024). My inelegantly made point was that the scarcity shouldn't have an impact on how a play should be ruled. We can debate the return on effort for examining a once in a lifetime / season / week play but, given all of our high level expertise, that's the ones we have left to debate. [Edit: 1,207 instead of 1,087 when I correctly include F2 (an A'Ha! moment brushing my teeth) - though, only 120 instances in 2,430 games of F2 handling a batted ball makes me question the data or, more likely, my search capabilities]

A ground ball is hit to F3 with less than 2 outs and an R1 0.47 times per game (just under once every other game).

Because there is no rule that makes unintentional interference illegal by a runner on ball four. Fair to say it's treated as tangle/untangle with BR ok as long as he "did what he's supposed to"?

I may be misunderstanding you but any runner with a ball hit behind him can create that by "running to the glove" to get in the throwing lane and it's perfectly legal unless they make an overt act to interfere à la Cole Calhoun (and some argue even that wasn't enough to get INT).

In FED the D3K interface needs to be intentional. NCAA, any hindrance by the BR kills it and the BR is out. What about OBR?

I concur on "that's nothing" for ball 4. On U3K we've got BR-INT, BR out, all runners return, yeah?

In case not aware, you don't have to have facebook account to view video in the above link (but I understand someone who doesn't even want to go to Facebook.com). Here is the YouTube link

BOOM. That was the missing piece for me. Given that, the old infielder timing (you know that cool F6 that holds, pumps, shuffles and then finally throws) was close enough that they didn't need a recalibration.

Actually, only 4.5" (between 1st and 2nd and between 2nd ans 3rd). https://www.mlb.com/glossary/rules/base-sizes Thanks for helping me see I mistyped 6" in referring to 1B getting 3" closer to home plate with no apparent impact.

Duh. We don't play on a "baseball square". 😁 oh, nevermind...

Thanks @Coach Carl Huh. So 1B and 3B are in the wrong spot because of poor editing / proofreading. Learned something new. Reminds me, with the larger bases BR got a 6 inch advantage. I haven't seen anything to say it mattered. I guess infielders quickly adjusted their internal clocks?

True and he sure went and did it somewhere else 🤣

You really have rabbit ears if you can hear a shutter from a camera that's beyond the wall in CF. I got too concise given a context switch. The camera was behind the backstop.

Noise distraction too. I've had a photographer with rapid shoot that sounded like a machine gun going off from a very close backstop. I moved that guy real quick.