Swing on IBB - strike?

[Jocko]

OK I get it now - if it wasn't possible to hit the ball it's a "ball" even though the batter swung.

So if a batter flails away at a low and away curve and misses it buy a foot it's a "ball" because he couldn't possibly have hit it.

I get it now.

Thanks all.

no no no. He INTENDED to hit the curve that spun him in the ground. He swun..... Oops. I mean he ATTEMPTED to actually hit that pitch. The IBB, he was just swinging for the helluvit to add pitches. I don't understand WHY you people don't understand!!! From now on, we have to judge not only INT intent on kicked batted balls etc., we have to judge intent on swin.... Oops.. I mean attempts to hit the ball when the batter maneuvers the bat all the way through the strike zone.

Question.... If there is no such thing as a swing, how can there be a backswing (which most definitely IS in the book)? Just curious. :shrug:

[RichMSN]

Those who think this is a no-brainer -- let's just say that it's not.

[Dragon29]

In Little League with closed bases, if the pitcher drops the ball while standing on the rubber; it's a illegal pitch, not a balk.

If the pitcher drops the ball 4 times to achieve an IBB, what do you have?

What if the batter swings the bat after the drop?

I actually had this a few seasons ago. LL Majors - After coming set, F1 dropped the ball; I called 'Ball.' From the offensive dugout I heard, "Do it again." Next pitch, same thing. I called 'Ball' and then 'Time.' I went & spoke w/the manager - a guy I'd known for years and who had been UIC for a different local LL - and asked him what he was doing. He was very up front about it and told me he was trying to save pitches for his F1. I said, "Cut it out." He said, "Why? There's no rule against it." I said, "Yes, there is."

He shook his head and said, "OK." The rest of the AB went fine; F1 threw two pitches outside the zone and the batter was walked.

For what it's worth, I didn't really have 8.02( B) in my head when I told him to cut it out. It just seemed 'wrong' at the time. I have since learned to not umpire 'by my gut' but I am glad I stopped him.

[Jocko]

Those who think this is a no-brainer -- let's just say that it's not.

Those who think there is a possibility for this pitch to be called anything but a strike -- let's just say there's not.

And there was a second gunman on the grassy knoll

Neil Armstrong never took Lunar steps

Joe jackson threw the WS

Y2K will see the end of life as we know it

Pfft..... :shakehead:

[RichMSN]

This is a Little League question. The answer given by Little League officials is the only one that matters, no matter your (or my) personal opinion.

[JaxRolo]

Goodness Gracious. I don't give a Flying Fü$k what Williamsport says. Again the OP said the kid swung. STRIKE!!

I said so!

[Jocko]

This is a Little League question. The answer given by Little League officials is the only one that matters, no matter your (or my) personal opinion.

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. That explains ALOT...........

[RichMSN]

Yup, explains a lot, but not about the situation.

It always amazes me when people blast Little League without having even a small clue. I mean, what other organization has detailed pitch count rules?

And Jax, your opinion is being given (by me) all the due it's worth. :)

[JaxRolo]

Yup, explains a lot, but not about the situation.

It always amazes me when people blast Little League without having even a small clue. I mean, what other organization has detailed pitch count rules?

And Jax, your opinion is being given (by me) all the due it's worth.

I really need to get a life. I enjoy Umpire discussion. Right or wrong I love it. I probably spend 50-70% of my awake hours with something umpire related.

I'm either on here, ABUA, reading rules, case books are other umpire manuals.

I need professional help!

[Jocko]

Yup, explains a lot, but not about the situation.

It always amazes me when people blast Little League without having even a small clue. I mean, what other organization has detailed pitch count rules?

And Jax, your opinion is being given (by me) all the due it's worth.

I really need to get a life. I enjoy Umpire discussion. Right or wrong I love it. I probably spend 50-70% of my awake hours with something umpire related.

I'm either on here, ABUA, reading rules, case books are other umpire manuals.

I need professional help!

I guess I do too. I'm poring over case plays, studying rules, watching video, reading blogs.... I take this stuff VERY serious. SWMBO just rolls her eyes.

[Rich Ives]

This is a Little League question. The answer given by Little League officials is the only one that matters, no matter your (or my) personal opinion.

Do you think the OBR answer would be different? Or the FED answer. Or the NCAA answer?

[KLAH316]

I can't believe this thread has gone on for 5 pages......

Pretty soon it may hit legend.....wait for it.....ary status like the FSB!!

ok, continue the discussion! :fuel:

[Jocko]

This is a Little League question. The answer given by Little League officials is the only one that matters, no matter your (or my) personal opinion.

Do you think the OBR answer would be different? Or the FED answer. Or the NCAA answer?

Rainman, you know LL is the be-all/end-all. Bud Selig calls WP for the go ahead on new rules/interps. NFHS rules committees have LL prez on speed dial. NCAA bases their mechanics on LL. Everyone emulates and admires LL so much that it's the goto in any sitch.

[HokieUmp]

This is a Little League question. The answer given by Little League officials is the only one that matters, no matter your (or my) personal opinion.

Do you think the OBR answer would be different? Or the FED answer. Or the NCAA answer?

Yes, they WILL be different. They would say "We don't have pitch-count rules, so get the %^&$% out of our office!"

[RichMSN]

Trout -- of course MLB isn't going to consult LL. Like was posted, the pitch count introduces situations that don't exist elsewhere. Other levels have to deal with shenanigans related to the time limits put on games. It's always fun watching teams bastardize games by intentionally trying to make outs or delaying just to work the clock, isn't it?

What I don't get is this inherent disdain for Little League and people who choose to umpire it. I don't blast people who whore themselves out for 7 games in a day for a paycheck, even though I've never seen a guy work a 7th game who wasn't complete dogspit. And yet people blast me cause I choose to work some of my schedule for free to give back to the community. Not that it bothers me a whole lot, but I do find it interesting.

We had a weird situation locally involving a high school basketball clinic put on my association where I'm on the board. We received an email from an official who was angry because we took a tournament to use as part of our clinic. His complaint? He didn't have the opportunity to work the tournament for $25 a game. Maybe that's it -- some people are annoyed that LL expects people to volunteer. Eh, so what. Not everything in life's about money, although you wouldn't catch me working college ball or adult ball for free.

[Rich Ives]

This is a Little League question. The answer given by Little League officials is the only one that matters, no matter your (or my) personal opinion.

Do you think the OBR answer would be different? Or the FED answer. Or the NCAA answer?

Yes, they WILL be different. They would say "We don't have pitch-count rules, so get the %^&$% out of our office!"

It's not about pitch counts - it's about whether or not swinging at an IBB pitch is a strike.

[noumpere]

Swinging AT the pitch or swinging DURING the pitch? they could be different (at least that seems to be the arguemnent some are making). And I think the point is that this will only happen where there are pitch counts (and where theres a prohibition against "accidenta;;y" letting the next pitch go waaaay inside.)

[umpire_scott]

Good coaching could take care of this problem. If I'm going to tell my kid to swing at the pitch and he makes an attempt that can even be construed as not offering, I'm going to be chewing on him in the dugout. It's really not that hard to swing and miss, but make it look good.

[Rich Ives]

Good coaching could take care of this problem. If I'm going to tell my kid to swing at the pitch and he makes an attempt that can even be construed as not offering, I'm going to be chewing on him in the dugout. It's really not that hard to swing and miss, but make it look good.

You're not getting it.

Some are saying that a perfectly executed swing an an IBB pitch 4' outside is not a strike simply because the pitch wasn't intended to be hit (by either party actually).

[kylejt]

Here's the question:

Is a swing, any swing, considered an attempt to strike at the ball, in every situation?

[Rich Ives]

Yes.

Pitcher's depriving that batter of the ability to get a hit. Batter retaliates by stealing pitches toward the pitcher's pitch count (official or unofficial). Fair game on both ends.

[umpire_scott]

Good coaching could take care of this problem. If I'm going to tell my kid to swing at the pitch and he makes an attempt that can even be construed as not offering, I'm going to be chewing on him in the dugout. It's really not that hard to swing and miss, but make it look good.

You're not getting it.

Some are saying that a perfectly executed swing an an IBB pitch 4' outside is not a strike simply because the pitch wasn't intended to be hit (by either party actually).

No I think you are the one not getting it. The OP clearly stated that the batter made no attempt AT the ball. He never said he tried but couldn't reach it. I don't think there would have been any question by anyone as to whether it should be called a strike if the batter legitimately tried to hit the ball.

[Jocko]

Good coaching could take care of this problem. If I'm going to tell my kid to swing at the pitch and he makes an attempt that can even be construed as not offering, I'm going to be chewing on him in the dugout. It's really not that hard to swing and miss, but make it look good.

You're not getting it.

Some are saying that a perfectly executed swing an an IBB pitch 4' outside is not a strike simply because the pitch wasn't intended to be hit (by either party actually).

and there you have it. Proof positive.

No I think you are the one not getting it. The OP clearly stated that the batter made no attempt AT the ball. He never said he tried but couldn't reach it. I don't think there would have been any question by anyone as to whether it should be called a strike if the batter legitimately tried to hit the ball.

Ok , say the batter, during an IBB, steps into the path of the pitch. He steps across the plate, into the opposite BB and intentionally gets HBP. Noone in their right mind is giving him 1B, would you then call it a ball?

[JaxRolo]

Good coaching could take care of this problem. If I'm going to tell my kid to swing at the pitch and he makes an attempt that can even be construed as not offering, I'm going to be chewing on him in the dugout. It's really not that hard to swing and miss, but make it look good.

You're not getting it.

Some are saying that a perfectly executed swing an an IBB pitch 4' outside is not a strike simply because the pitch wasn't intended to be hit (by either party actually).

No I think you are the one not getting it. The OP clearly stated that the batter made no attempt AT the ball. He never said he tried but couldn't reach it. I don't think there would have been any question by anyone as to whether it should be called a strike if the batter legitimately tried to hit the ball.

Oh my GOD!!!

For the last time theOP said he swung the bat. You don't need anything else to call a strike.

[UmpTTS43]

Using post #100 to ask, .....

REALLY?