Jump to content
  • 0

Not calling a swinging strike due to intent


Umpire-Empire locks topics which have not been active in the last year. The thread you are viewing hasn't been active in 4132 days so you will not be able to post. We do recommend you starting a new topic to find out what's new in the world of umpiring.

Question

Guest Shawn
Posted

Little League Majors - tight game with a MLB player's kid up. 2nd and 3rd with 1st base unoccupied 1out. Intentional pass being given. Opposing coach tells kid to swing anyway to add to the pitch count. Umpire declares not a strike since "there was no real intent" to hit the ball."

 

Is that a thing?

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Posted

A swing is an offer to hit a pitch...that is different from a bat wave. If he's not trying to hit a pitch, I'd have no swing, especially if that was the coach's intent...that and hope that he says something ejectionable.

  • Like 2
  • 0
Posted

Any league with pitch counts should adopt the FED dead ball Intentional Base on Balls. One thing FED got right.

  • Like 1
  • 0
Posted

They couldn't put this on the tee any better for ya...

 

If there are four intentional balls comin', and the OT wants the batter to swing at two of them – no matter where they are – so as to register two strikes and drive up the pitch count, then there shouldn't be any issue with calling the third pitch a strike...

 

"Hey, it was right in your strike zone! The first two were no different!"

 

- - - - - - - - -

 

See, it's crap like this why intentional walks in youth baseball really should be a "verbalized award" ("You want to intentionally walk this batter? Yes? Very well, you! First base!"). If anyone tried to pull this slimey move in the Majors – where Big Leaguer Daddy should know better – that F1 would put that batter on 1B with a good solid plunking in the thigh or back.

 

Of course, this wouldn't be so much of an issue if there wasn't a Pitch Counter. 

  • Like 3
  • 0
Posted

Any league with pitch counts should adopt the FED dead ball Intentional Base on Balls. One thing FED got right.

Does that mean they can just say they intend on walking a batter and the batter goes right to first? We have that rule in a few leagues here, I like that we have but I think it's a chump move.

  • 0
Posted

Any league with pitch counts should adopt the FED dead ball Intentional Base on Balls. One thing FED got right.
Does that mean they can just say they intend on walking a batter and the batter goes right to first? We have that rule in a few leagues here, I like that we have but I think it's a chump move.

Note that it was directly stated that 'leagues with pitch counts should adopt this'

I'm not sure about the whole 'FED got it right' but agree with the opening statement

  • 0
Posted

 

Any league with pitch counts should adopt the FED dead ball Intentional Base on Balls. One thing FED got right.

Does that mean they can just say they intend on walking a batter and the batter goes right to first? We have that rule in a few leagues here, I like that we have but I think it's a chump move.

 

 

Yes: coach (or F2) requests time, and says something to the effect of, "put him on" ("I'd like to walk him," "Intentional base on balls," etc. etc.). The batter goes to 1B, we put the ball in play, and off we go. Can be done on any count. FED 2-4-3

  • 0
Posted

LL tried it a few years back, coaches not understanding the purpose intentional walk, the abuse was rampant. They would start the inning by loading the bases maybe even walk in a run to get to the weaker batters.

 

LL dumped it after 2 years.

  • 0
Posted

Any league with pitch counts should adopt the FED dead ball Intentional Base on Balls. One thing FED got right.

 

No.  Running up the pitch count is legit. No different than fouling to get the ball back or taking a knee to run time off the clock.

  • 0
Posted

 

Any league with pitch counts should adopt the FED dead ball Intentional Base on Balls. One thing FED got right.

 

No.  Running up the pitch count is legit. No different than fouling to get the ball back or taking a knee to run time off the clock.

 

 

You two aren't disagreeing. You're saying the rules currently allow it. Richvee is saying they shouldn't.

  • Like 1
  • 0
Posted

 

 

Any league with pitch counts should adopt the FED dead ball Intentional Base on Balls. One thing FED got right.

 

No.  Running up the pitch count is legit. No different than fouling to get the ball back or taking a knee to run time off the clock.

 

 

You two aren't disagreeing. You're saying the rules currently allow it. Richvee is saying they shouldn't.

 

We may disagree that I think it should be changed, while Rich thinks it's fine as is.

We do agree the rules currently allow it.

 

My point is more towards my feelings that it's just silly. It's over regulation --

:sarcasm:  if we're going to count intentional walk pitches, we should be counting warmup pitches. :sarcasm:  After all, F1 is probably throwing his warm ups a lot harder than those IBB throws. We already have pitcing/catching regulations in LL. What's next, x number of throws from f6 and he needs to be replaced? it's out of control. Count pitches, that's one thing. Let's leave it there, and 4 lobs for a walk shouldn't count. (MHO)

  • 0
Posted

I think the 'not a strike' call in the OP is correct.  I don't plan to ever call it that way.  

 

I have heard a story about a stick with a dirty end.....

  • 0
Posted

I think the 'not a strike' call in the OP is correct.  I don't plan to ever call it that way.  

 

I have heard a story about a stick with a dirty end.....

 

Depends on which dugout you want to have complaining. ;)

  • 0
Posted

 

 

Any league with pitch counts should adopt the FED dead ball Intentional Base on Balls. One thing FED got right.

 

No.  Running up the pitch count is legit. No different than fouling to get the ball back or taking a knee to run time off the clock.

 

 

You two aren't disagreeing. You're saying the rules currently allow it. Richvee is saying they shouldn't.

 

 

Let's put it this way.

 

If it's legit to IBB "Slugger" to avoid him it's legit to run up a pitcher's pitch count to get him out sooner.  Goose/Gander.

  • 0
Posted

2.00 A STRIKE is a legal pitch when so called by the umpire, which—
(a) Is struck at by the batter and is missed;

 

5.03 The pitcher shall deliver the pitch to the batter who may elect to strike the ball, or who may not offer at it, as he chooses.

 

 

I'm looking for the part that says "if the batter misses the pitch by more than "x" inches it shall not be called a strike". Can someone please point out where that is?  Thanks.

  • 0
Posted

 

 

 

Any league with pitch counts should adopt the FED dead ball Intentional Base on Balls. One thing FED got right.

 

No.  Running up the pitch count is legit. No different than fouling to get the ball back or taking a knee to run time off the clock.

 

 

You two aren't disagreeing. You're saying the rules currently allow it. Richvee is saying they shouldn't.

 

 

Let's put it this way.

 

If it's legit to IBB "Slugger" to avoid him it's legit to run up a pitcher's pitch count to get him out sooner.  Goose/Gander.

 

As an umpire I wouls surely call the swings strikes. I do agree with you Rich. Given the rules as they are. If I were a coach I'd have my "slugger" swing twice and make the IBB count as 7 pitches. 

 

That said, I think making a pitcher throw 4 balls for for a IBB in any league that counts pitches is silly. They're not even close to full effort pitches. Should we count throws F1 makes to 1st base fielding a bunt? Silly. Call time, hold up 4 fingers and put slugger on 1st. And to @ScubaUmp -- then at least make it a LL tourney rule. Nobody's walking 3 or 4 guys guys to get to the bottom of a tournament lineup. 

×
×
  • Create New...