Something else that's never happened to me...

[Thunderheads]

...Until yesterday ... I am BU, in C.

R2, ..... 1 out, ....

R2 takes off for third .... catcher gets the pitch, stands up and fires to 3rd and his throw hits the batters bat as he is standing in the batters box.

What do you have?

[mazzamouth]

A bad throw.. and if the ball goes out of play, its 2 bases from the time of throw...LOL

[Thunderheads]

A bad throw.. and if the ball goes out of play, its 2 bases from the time of throw...LOL

LOL .... Mike, I know you know the answer and can probably cite it ...I can't find it, ...it's got to be in 6.00, right? It's driving me nuts!

I'll wait for a few answers until I post what we did.....

[Rich Ives]

A bad throw.. and if the ball goes out of play, its 2 bases from the time of throw...LOL

LOL .... Mike, I know you know the answer and can probably cite it ...I can't find it, ...it's got to be in 6.00, right? It's driving me nuts!

I'll wait for a few answers until I post what we did.....

What would you call if it hit the batter instead of his bat?

Why is this any different?

[Thunderheads]

A bad throw.. and if the ball goes out of play, its 2 bases from the time of throw...LOL

LOL .... Mike, I know you know the answer and can probably cite it ...I can't find it, ...it's got to be in 6.00, right? It's driving me nuts!

I'll wait for a few answers until I post what we did.....

What would you call if it hit the batter instead of his bat?

Why is this any different?

Nothing.......

[carolinablue]

6.06 [c] says the batter is out if he interferes with the catchers fielding or throwing by stepping out of the box or making any other movement that hinders the catcher's play at home base.

So if he didn't do anything described in the rule then it's nothing except as already stated a bad throw.

[Thunderheads]

6.06 [c] says the batter is out if he interferes with the catchers fielding or throwing by stepping out of the box or making any other movement that hinders the catcher's play at home base.

So if he didn't do anything described in the rule then it's nothing except as already stated a bad throw.

Yes, ...and that's all I found ....

The runner advanced to 3rd ....the catcher picked up the ball and called 'time'. We got a few "dead ball" yells, and "interference, runner goes back to second" ...... in 'time', my partner called me in to clarify at the request of the VC and said, ..."I've got nothing" ...and I said ..."batter just stood there, he owns the box...I've got nothing also" ...

[SnareDrum]

I had an INT on Saturday when the batter ducked down and back and the throw bounced off his helmet when R2 attempted to steal 3rd. It was the 3rd out and the coach came by on his way to to coach 3B and asked, "Isn't the batter entitled to the box?" (Where that ever came from I'll never know). I told him, "Only if he doesn't move and interfere with the throw."

Thinking about that "entitlement" quote and how many times I've heard it or something similar, is there ever a time when the batter is entitled to the batter's box and anything he does inside of it is OK? (Besides NOT moving to hinder or int on a throw?)

[Guest]

A bad throw.. and if the ball goes out of play, its 2 bases from the time of throw...LOL

LOL .... Mike, I know you know the answer and can probably cite it ...I can't find it, ...it's got to be in 6.00, right? It's driving me nuts!

I'll wait for a few answers until I post what we did.....

What would you call if it hit the batter instead of his bat?

Why is this any different?

When this happened to me in 07, I had a concussed batter lying on the ground, a scored run, and a distraught catcher who thought he had killed the batter.

Roger,

The entitlement argument comes from this exact situation. Smart coaches tell their players not to move a muscle because if they do this, they are legally making the catcher's throw more difficult. To the casual observer, this does indeed create a sense of entitlement to the 6x4 chalked area. Every other instance I can think of mandates the party (base coach, fielder, runner) to get out of the way so that the subsequent play can occur. Improperly insert the e word into an explanation, even though it does apply in a way, and it becomes "my batter can do anything he wants inside the chalk"

[yawetag]

is there ever a time when the batter is entitled to the batter's box and anything he does inside of it is OK?

I'll hazard a guess: between the pitcher's initial motion to pitch and the catcher catching the pitch.

Edit: Sorta not true, though. He can't chicken-wing a pitch to be awarded 1B.

[mstaylor]

When explaining 6.06c to coaches, do not say the batter owns the box, because he doesn't. He has the right to stay there and swing. If the catcher catches the ball or it is right at his feet then batter doesn't have time to move. By staying still the catcher knows where he is and gives him two clear throwing lanes. By moving, even if he is trying to clear, he is putting himself at risk. It is still possible to interfere while staying in the box, ask Billy Ripken, so saying he owns the box is inacurate and misleading.

[Thunderheads]

When explaining 6.06c to coaches, do not say the batter owns the box, because he doesn't. He has the right to stay there and swing. If the catcher catches the ball or it is right at his feet then batter doesn't have time to move. By staying still the catcher knows where he is and gives him two clear throwing lanes. By moving, even if he is trying to clear, he is putting himself at risk. It is still possible to interfere while staying in the box, ask Billy Ripken, so saying he owns the box is inacurate and misleading.

But only by moving around, and interfering, ...yes?

[mstaylor]

Yes, in the case of Billy, he stepped straight back in the box and got hit.

[Thunderheads]

Yes, in the case of Billy, he stepped straight back in the box and got hit.

Got it ... thanks!

[mazzamouth]

...and I said ..."batter just stood there, he owns the box...I've got nothing also" ...

I hate this, cause it is not true, just cause he is in the Box does not make it a safe haven, he still can interfere in the box.

[mazzamouth]

I had an INT on Saturday when the batter ducked down and back and the throw bounced off his helmet when R2 attempted to steal 3rd. It was the 3rd out and the coach came by on his way to to coach 3B and asked, "Isn't the batter entitled to the box?" (Where that ever came from I'll never know). I told him, "Only if he doesn't move and interfere with the throw."

Thinking about that "entitlement" quote and how many times I've heard it or something similar, is there ever a time when the batter is entitled to the batter's box and anything he does inside of it is OK? (Besides NOT moving to hinder or int on a throw?)

The batter ducked trying to get out of the way, and you called INT? how bad was that throw from F2?

[carolinablue]

I had an INT on Saturday when the batter ducked down and back and the throw bounced off his helmet when R2 attempted to steal 3rd. It was the 3rd out and the coach came by on his way to to coach 3B and asked, "Isn't the batter entitled to the box?" (Where that ever came from I'll never know). I told him, "Only if he doesn't move and interfere with the throw."

Thinking about that "entitlement" quote and how many times I've heard it or something similar, is there ever a time when the batter is entitled to the batter's box and anything he does inside of it is OK? (Besides NOT moving to hinder or int on a throw?)

The batter ducked trying to get out of the way, and you called INT? how bad was that throw from F2?

He said the throw went off his helmet due to the fact that he ducked into the catchers throwing lane. Why would that not be INT.

[Mr Umpire]

I had an INT on Saturday when the batter ducked down and back and the throw bounced off his helmet when R2 attempted to steal 3rd. It was the 3rd out and the coach came by on his way to to coach 3B and asked, "Isn't the batter entitled to the box?" (Where that ever came from I'll never know). I told him, "Only if he doesn't move and interfere with the throw."

Thinking about that "entitlement" quote and how many times I've heard it or something similar, is there ever a time when the batter is entitled to the batter's box and anything he does inside of it is OK? (Besides NOT moving to hinder or int on a throw?)

The batter ducked trying to get out of the way, and you called INT? how bad was that throw from F2?

He said the throw went off his helmet due to the fact that he ducked into the catchers throwing lane. Why would that not be INT.

I think it would depend on how far down he "ducked". If he "ducked" with his head as low as his waist, then I see no INT call. But, if it was just down to his shoulders, I can see an INT call possible especially since he moved back as well. I can definitely see how it would be a possible INT call but definitely HTBT to make any judgment on it.

[SnareDrum]

I had an INT on Saturday when the batter ducked down and back and the throw bounced off his helmet when R2 attempted to steal 3rd. It was the 3rd out and the coach came by on his way to to coach 3B and asked, "Isn't the batter entitled to the box?" (Where that ever came from I'll never know). I told him, "Only if he doesn't move and interfere with the throw."

Thinking about that "entitlement" quote and how many times I've heard it or something similar, is there ever a time when the batter is entitled to the batter's box and anything he does inside of it is OK? (Besides NOT moving to hinder or int on a throw?)

The batter ducked trying to get out of the way, and you called INT? how bad was that throw from F2?

He said the throw went off his helmet due to the fact that he ducked into the catchers throwing lane. Why would that not be INT.

I think it would depend on how far down he "ducked". If he "ducked" with his head as low as his waist, then I see no INT call. But, if it was just down to his shoulders, I can see an INT call possible especially since he moved back as well. I can definitely see how it would be a possible INT call but definitely HTBT to make any judgment on it.

F2 tried to throw behind the batter and he had set up deep in the catcher's box probably because the batter was up a little in his. As he caught and threw the batter ducked down and back, pretty much turning at the same time. Same instant the throw glanced off the batter's helmet and R2 slid into 3B as the ball bounced off the fence. Since F2 had a clean throw before/without the batter's movement into the path of the throw, I had INT.

That E-word has could also have evolved from coaches telling their batters to not move if they're in the box, to not moving out of the box if they're in it... or something like that MLB and other well coached players just turn to statues because they know the rule. There's nothing about avoiding the throw or box ownership. But there is about not making any movement that interferes, hinders, or distracts. Pretty much always a HTBT.

[mazzamouth]

Your 3 favorite words to a coach need to Be " In My Judgment" I had INT.....or i had nothing