Wendelstedt Manual Confusion

[mjr_2013]

Wendelstedt Rules and Interpretations Manual

 

"7.3.2.c - Switching Batter's Boxes

After the pitcher has initially indicated which arm he will deliver with, the batter may switch batter's boxes only once per that at-bat, per pitcher he faces. The batter may switch from one batter's box if the pitcher is not prepared to pitch, however, he may not switch boxes when the pitcher is on rubber with the ball. [6.06(b)]

 

Enforcement 7.3.2.c

If the batter attempts to switch boxes more than once per at-bat with the same pitcher pitching, the umpire will instruct him to return to the previous box. If the batter attempts to switch batter's boxes after the pitche has engaged the rubber with the ball, the umpire will call time, and then call the batter out."

 

6.06 states "A batter is out for illegal action when - (b) He steps from one batter's box to the other while the pitcher is in position ready to pitch."

 

I have no problem with that part of 7.3.2.c, but does anyone know where the interpretation for the first part, of only changing boxes one time per at-bat comes from? There is a myth in many circles about changing batter's boxes, whether it be that it's not allowed at all, not allowed with two strikes, yada yada yada.... To be honest, I thought that this idea, of only being able to change once, was a myth as well, and that as long as the pitcher was not in a position to pitch, the batter was free to change back and forth after every pitch if so chose.

 

This is my second time reading the manual, and didn't even notice the first time. Any ideas?

[Senor Azul]

From the 2014 edition of Carl Childress' BRD:

 

Official Interpretation from PBUC (2004 edition): Facing an ambidextrous pitcher, the batter may switch positions one time, after which he will remain in that position throughout the at-bat.

 

Mr. Childress inserted a note after that entry which reads: OBR added 8.01f in 2007, at which time PBUC deleted its OI for dealing with ambidextrous pitchers/batters. The OBR does not address switch-hitters. BRD recommends: Use the (PBUC) OI.

 

Not sure why there is so much concern about ambidextrous pitchers--I have never seen one in any of my games. Anyway, it appears that it seemed fair that this limitation on an ambidextrous pitcher should be applied to a switch-hitter as well.

[Rich Ives]

 

Not sure why there is so much concern about ambidextrous pitchers--I have never seen one in any of my games. Anyway, it appears that it seemed fair that this limitation on an ambidextrous pitcher should be applied to a switch-hitter as well.

 

Maybe - but there's no rule support for it other than for the ambi pitcher situation.

[Jimurray]

Not sure why there is so much concern about ambidextrous pitchers--I have never seen one in any of my games. Anyway, it appears that it seemed fair that this limitation on an ambidextrous pitcher should be applied to a switch-hitter as well.

 

Maybe - but there's no rule support for it other than for the ambi pitcher situation.

I wonder when the sit might present itself, with or without an ambi pitcher? When would a switch hitter change twice? I can envision numerous sits with one switch but I can't think of a sit with two. If there is one Rich will enlighten us.

[Replacematt]

 

 

Not sure why there is so much concern about ambidextrous pitchers--I have never seen one in any of my games. Anyway, it appears that it seemed fair that this limitation on an ambidextrous pitcher should be applied to a switch-hitter as well.

 

Maybe - but there's no rule support for it other than for the ambi pitcher situation.

I wonder when the sit might present itself, with or without an ambi pitcher? When would a switch hitter change twice? I can envision numerous sits with one switch but I can't think of a sit with two. If there is one Rich will enlighten us.

 

 

I can imagine it with R1 and R3.

[mjr_2013]

So would this one switch only apply only with an ambi pitcher then? 

[Rich Ives]

So would this one switch only apply only with an ambi pitcher then? 

 

 

According to the rules as they appear to be written - yes.

[basejester]

[NorthTexasUmp]

Dang it!! I was at a clininc this weekend that Shaylor Smith, the HPU, was an instructor. Would have loved to hear him tell this story.

[umpschool]

The interpretation for how many times a batter may switch batter's boxes applies in any situation, ambidextrous pitcher or not. This interpretation has been around well before the ambidextrous pitcher rule, and is one that we argued did not have rulebook support. In fact, since the rule now limits the pitcher to how many times he may switch arms, we still believe that this interpretation is not necessary. It was put in place to prevent the back and forth action by the batter and the pitcher. That is no longer needed now that the batter has the last say in effect.

[Jimurray]

The interpretation for how many times a batter may switch batter's boxes applies in any situation, ambidextrous pitcher or not. This interpretation has been around well before the ambidextrous pitcher rule, and is one that we argued did not have rulebook support. In fact, since the rule now limits the pitcher to how many times he may switch arms, we still believe that this interpretation is not necessary. It was put in place to prevent the back and forth action by the batter and the pitcher. That is no longer needed now that the batter has the last say in effect.

So it appears there is now no interp (in the current PBUC or MLBUM) that limits how many times the batter can switch facing a pitcher, ambi or not? Even the "don't switch until a pitch has been thrown" is now gone. If an interp has been in a previous PBUC or MLBUM and no longer is has it been repudiated or accepted as gospel? I realize that this is much ado about something that Childress would hope that it does not happen in your game and the odds are rare that you will see it. But something like it did occur and they had to change the rulebook.