Did he attempt to get out of the way???

[Thunderheads]

WOW !!!!!!?????

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=21320929&c_id=mlb

[Mr Umpire]

I don't agree with the conference. Either PU has no attempt or he has one. This PC crap is getting old.

I had an attempt. The ball was about a foot or so in the batter's box. It may only be 87 mph which isn't fast for that level but he can't assume it isn't a breaking pitch or something. I would have given 1B without a thought on this one b/c not to gives F1 an advantage.

[Thunderheads]

What could have Bautista have done otherwise?!?! Like Mr Umpire said, .... that pitch was AT LEAST a foot inside ....

[zm1283]

Yeah, I don't see how you wouldn't have a HBP here. What else should he have done?

[JaxRolo]

I like that they did get together and made the right call.

[Mudder]

I don't like the conference either, I've never seen or heard, at any level, a ump conference to discuss whether the batter made an attempt to avoid. I can perhaps understand a conference to discuss if a pitch hits a batter or not, but attempt to avoid is always PU judgement. This was a no-brainer HBP, would like to know what PU's thought process was. I know there was some words between the ump and Bautista during that at bat just before this HBP

[Moriarty_45]

Maybe Welke had it hitting the knob of the bat. That is what it initally looked like to me. With the sound and the trajectory of the ricochet maybe that is what he saw.

[JaxRolo]

maybe he blink or had to Fart during the pitch and missed it.

[Jimurray]

Yeah, I don't see how you wouldn't have a HBP here. What else should he have done?

I think he saw the pitch as inside and Bautista rolling his hip into it. He was blocked on the pitch location and didn't know it was that far inside.

[Mudder]

Maybe Welke had it hitting the knob of the bat. That is what it initally looked like to me. With the sound and the trajectory of the ricochet maybe that is what he saw.

Great point, In reviewing the play again, I can see how he thought it may have hit the bat.

[johnnyg08]

Consider the call last week in Colorado where Helton was 3 feet off of 1B...nobody wants that on sportscenter.

He initially called it for hitting the bat. The conference confirmed that it indeed hit the batter.

They probably didn't show this in the clip, but two pitches earlier he thought a pitch hit his jersey and PU kept him there.

[Cajuncubsfan]

WOW !!!!!!?????

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=21320929&c_id=mlb

The kids around here have been taught to stand there and take the ball. The umpires have been letting them do this I guess. They freeze and don't move a bit. Well last year I had a Dixie Majors game (HS summer league) and I called a ball on a inside hit by pitch. The coach came unglued. I talked to my partner and he told me that they don't call that and that I need to change my call. Too this day I still think that is wrong. I want to make my stand on this but with me being new to this group and the older umpire having so much more experiance than me I have yealded to the standard. What do y'all think? A batter crowding the plate and taking a ball with out moving anything. Not even turning his back? Hell the one I got my ass jumped about I was tempted to call it a strike to make a point.

[Rich Ives]

The NCAA has in writing what is routinely called anyhow under other rules - if the pitch is in the batter's box it's a HBP - period.

Youth level kids often freeze up. Don't hold that against them.

Save the "didn't avoid" crap for the players that stick their arm into the pitch when it's between the stripes.

[dumbdumb]

Another, didn't he attempt to get out of the way? Hands are not part of the bat. What happens when the batter has his hand wrapped around the barrel end of the bat and pulls back the bunt attempt and gets hit on the finger at the barrel end and breaks his finger, just like when the pitch is inside and hits the batter on the hand and not the knob of the bat.

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=21344419&c_id=mlb

[Mr Umpire]

After watching the first video again, I think PU did have the bat hitting the ball. Only by watching Bautista over near the dugout. It looks like he is saying something about the bat to somebody.

[Mr Umpire]

Another, didn't he attempt to get out of the way? Hands are not part of the bat. What happens when the batter has his hand wrapped around the barrel end of the bat and pulls back the bunt attempt and gets hit on the finger at the barrel end and breaks his finger, just like when the pitch is inside and hits the batter on the hand and not the knob of the bat.

If he isn't attempting to bunt or hit the ball, then it will be a HBP as long as it wasn't in the strike zone.

Also, he needs to be better coached or worked with more. Wrapping your hands around the barrel isn't a good idea anyway.

[dumbdumb]

Another, didn't he attempt to get out of the way? Hands are not part of the bat. What happens when the batter has his hand wrapped around the barrel end of the bat and pulls back the bunt attempt and gets hit on the finger at the barrel end and breaks his finger, just like when the pitch is inside and hits the batter on the hand and not the knob of the bat.

If he isn't attempting to bunt or hit the ball, then it will be a HBP as long as it wasn't in the strike zone.

Also, he needs to be better coached or worked with more. Wrapping your hands around the barrel isn't a good idea anyway.

Can we assume, since he first showed bunt, that when he brings the bat way back to get out of the way, yet the ball accidentally hits the bat, that he is still considered bunting and therefor out for bunting on a 3rd strike, versus when he is up in the regular hitting position and he brings the bat way back to get out of the way, yet the ball accidentally hits the bat, he would be called for a regular foul ball and stay up to bat?

Also, as long as the ball was not over the plate, should the batter have been given first base if the ball hit him in the hand on the bunt ejection? I assume the crew had the ball hitting the bat and not the hand.

[Mr Umpire]

If he isn't attempting to bunt or hit the ball, then it will be a HBP as long as it wasn't in the strike zone.

Also, he needs to be better coached or worked with more. Wrapping your hands around the barrel isn't a good idea anyway.

Can we assume, since he first showed bunt, that when he brings the bat way back to get out of the way, yet the ball accidentally hits the bat, that he is still considered bunting and therefor out for bunting on a 3rd strike, versus when he is up in the regular hitting position and he brings the bat way back to get out of the way, yet the ball accidentally hits the bat, he would be called for a regular foul ball and stay up to bat?

Also, as long as the ball was not over the plate, should the batter have been given first base if the ball hit him in the hand on the bunt ejection? I assume the crew had the ball hitting the bat and not the hand.

No, we can't assume he is still bunting. He may be bringing it back to hit the ball. Once he is no longer attempting to bunt (umpire judgment), any ball that hits the bat will be considered a foul ball if it goes and stays foul or hits the batter afterwards.

I think the crew had the ball hitting the bat first and then the hand after he pulled the bat back. Even on replay it is hard to tell but I think they got it correct.

And, if the ball hit his hand first as he was no longer attempting to bunt or swing, he should be given 1B.

[johnnyg08]

I think this is a great call. Since he pulled the bat back, he was no longer attempting to bunt the ball, therefore it is a foul ball.

However, I won't be surprised if there is an interpretation posted about this. Esp since NCAA is in a rule cycle this year.

[UmpTTS43]

The NCAA has in writing what is routinely called anyhow under other rules - if the pitch is in the batter's box it's a HBP - period.

Youth level kids often freeze up. Don't hold that against them.

Save the "didn't avoid" crap for the players that stick their arm into the pitch when it's between the stripes.

If the pitch is in the box, although the batter is not required to make an attempt to avoid, he cannot initiate or create the contact with the pitch.

[dumbdumb]

If he isn't attempting to bunt or hit the ball, then it will be a HBP as long as it wasn't in the strike zone.

Also, he needs to be better coached or worked with more. Wrapping your hands around the barrel isn't a good idea anyway.

Can we assume, since he first showed bunt, that when he brings the bat way back to get out of the way, yet the ball accidentally hits the bat, that he is still considered bunting and therefor out for bunting on a 3rd strike, versus when he is up in the regular hitting position and he brings the bat way back to get out of the way, yet the ball accidentally hits the bat, he would be called for a regular foul ball and stay up to bat?

Also, as long as the ball was not over the plate, should the batter have been given first base if the ball hit him in the hand on the bunt ejection? I assume the crew had the ball hitting the bat and not the hand.

No, we can't assume he is still bunting. He may be bringing it back to hit the ball. Once he is no longer attempting to bunt (umpire judgment), any ball that hits the bat will be considered a foul ball if it goes and stays foul or hits the batter afterwards.

I think the crew had the ball hitting the bat first and then the hand after he pulled the bat back. Even on replay it is hard to tell but I think they got it correct.

And, if the ball hit his hand first as he was no longer attempting to bunt or swing, he should be given 1B.

"Once he is no longer attempting to bunt (umpire judgment),"

"I think the crew had the ball hitting the bat first and then the hand after he pulled the bat back. Even on replay it is hard to tell but I think they got it correct."

So, you think (umpire judgment) he was still attempting to bunt from what you see on the video??? Just asking in case this exact scenario happens to me.

I agree that the ball hit the bat first and then the hand.

[Fittske24]

In the first video, the fastball had some inside movement to it. If you stop the video at 0:04, you can see the PU gets blocked out by the catcher. Since the running fastball was on the inner half of the plate when the PU last saw it, he probably assumed the pitch was still over the plate when the batter was hit. As far as the conference, I dont think it was done to passify the coach. The MLB guys are good at owning their calls, even when replay shows that their initial call was incorrect. I would bet money the PU knew he missed something because he was blocked, so he went to get help.

[Haid D' Salaami]

I think the conference was good... sometimes you need to get help... not all the time, and what if someone saw something different.. like in this play...

Umpires like us,should, and not to please a coach, get help on calls...I had a call I wish I would have gotten help, but I tried to be the tough guy and stand my ground. and I messed it..

[Mr Umpire]

If he isn't attempting to bunt or hit the ball, then it will be a HBP as long as it wasn't in the strike zone.

Also, he needs to be better coached or worked with more. Wrapping your hands around the barrel isn't a good idea anyway.

Can we assume, since he first showed bunt, that when he brings the bat way back to get out of the way, yet the ball accidentally hits the bat, that he is still considered bunting and therefor out for bunting on a 3rd strike, versus when he is up in the regular hitting position and he brings the bat way back to get out of the way, yet the ball accidentally hits the bat, he would be called for a regular foul ball and stay up to bat?

Also, as long as the ball was not over the plate, should the batter have been given first base if the ball hit him in the hand on the bunt ejection? I assume the crew had the ball hitting the bat and not the hand.

No, we can't assume he is still bunting. He may be bringing it back to hit the ball. Once he is no longer attempting to bunt (umpire judgment), any ball that hits the bat will be considered a foul ball if it goes and stays foul or hits the batter afterwards.

I think the crew had the ball hitting the bat first and then the hand after he pulled the bat back. Even on replay it is hard to tell but I think they got it correct.

And, if the ball hit his hand first as he was no longer attempting to bunt or swing, he should be given 1B.

"Once he is no longer attempting to bunt (umpire judgment),"

"I think the crew had the ball hitting the bat first and then the hand after he pulled the bat back. Even on replay it is hard to tell but I think they got it correct."

So, you think (umpire judgment) he was still attempting to bunt from what you see on the video??? Just asking in case this exact scenario happens to me.

I agree that the ball hit the bat first and then the hand.

No, I didn't have an attempt. He was getting out of the way of the pitch.

[johnnyg08]

I think the conference was good... sometimes you need to get help... not all the time, and what if someone saw something different.. like in this play...

Umpires like us,should, and not to please a coach, get help on calls...I had a call I wish I would have gotten help, but I tried to be the tough guy and stand my ground. and I messed it..

That really is the test. How do we stand our ground, yet not be so stubborn that we kick the crud out of one.

Haid, are you comfortable sharing the nature of the situation? Teams, dates, locations are irrelevant and not needed.