Uncaught Third Strike, No call

[Guest Anthony]

Situation: 9 year old tournament play.  Runner on third, two outs, 1 ball, two strikes

Runner on third take a large lead off.  Catcher drops pitch but ump makes no call at all.  Batter stands in batters box and watches runner from third steal home.  Ump calls runner safe.  Fielding team's coach tells catcher to throw to first.  When first baseman catches ball, umpire calls strike and third out.  Run does not count.  Inning over.

 

What should have happened on this play?

 

 

[ShotKaller]

Before I pick this apart it would appear that it was handled correctly based on the information provided...... As far as the rules go. EXCEPT, I can't remember the last time I saw a little league or Cal Ripken 9U game where base runners could lead off before the pitch reached home plate. My hat goes off to the coach rolling the "squeeze" on 1-2 with 2 outs with 9 year olds. 

The umpire mechanics on the other hand could have been better:

1. Umpire should have immediately signaled strike and also verbalized "strike" if it was not a swinging strike. 

2. An immediate safe signal (no verbal) would be the correct mechanic for the dropped pitch.

3. Batter is entitled to stand in the box on the play unless interference, in the umpires judgement, occurred. 

4. If R3 reaches home safely, and the catcher makes a play on the runner after recovering the ball, runner should be signaled/called safe.

5. When the first baseman receives the ball, and demonstrates control by a voluntary release, the batter-runner should be declared out ( signal and verbal ).

6. PU should immediately announce "This run does not score!" This is because the out at first is a force out, and the batter-runner MUST reach first base safely (when there are already two outs) in order for any run(s) to score on the play. 

[maven]

Before I pick this apart it would appear that it was handled correctly based on the information provided...... As far as the rules go. EXCEPT, I can't remember the last time I saw a little league or Cal Ripken 9U game where base runners could lead off before the pitch reached home plate. My hat goes off to the coach rolling the "squeeze" on 1-2 with 2 outs with 9 year olds. 

The umpire mechanics on the other hand could have been better:

1. Umpire should have immediately signaled strike and also verbalized "strike" if it was not a swinging strike. 

2. An immediate safe signal (no verbal) would be the correct mechanic for the dropped pitch.

3. Batter is entitled to stand in the box on the play unless interference, in the umpires judgement, occurred. 

4. If R3 reaches home safely, and the catcher makes a play on the runner after recovering the ball, runner should be signaled/called safe.

5. When the first baseman receives the ball, and demonstrates control by a voluntary release, the batter-runner should be declared out ( signal and verbal ).

6. PU should immediately announce "This run does not score!" This is because the out at first is a force out, and the batter-runner MUST reach first base safely (when there are already two outs) in order for any run(s) to score on the play. 

​Regarding this: on a third strike not legally caught, signal "safe" AND verbalize "no catch!" We need a verbal here because the two people who most need to know our ruling of no catch are the BR and F2, neither of whom is likely to be looking at us.

Regarding this: the batter is NOT entitled to remain in the box. He is required by rule to vacate any space needed by the defense to play on R3 (in this case). Your caveat about "unless INT occurred" seems to suggest that the batter must do something to be liable for INT, but that's incorrect: since he is not entitled to be there, if his merely being there "in the way" hinders F2, then that by itself would constitute INT.

Regarding this: no play on the BR can be a force play, and we try to be precise about that. You are correct that no run can score when the batter makes the 3rd out before safely reaching 1B.

Otherwise, good post!

[Rich Ives]

​Regarding this: on a third strike not legally caught, signal "safe" AND verbalize "no catch!" We need a verbal here because the two people who most need to know our ruling of no catch are the BR and F2, neither of whom is likely to be looking at us.

Regarding this: the batter is NOT entitled to remain in the box. He is required by rule to vacate any space needed by the defense to play on R3 (in this case). Your caveat about "unless INT occurred" seems to suggest that the batter must do something to be liable for INT, but that's incorrect: since he is not entitled to be there, if his merely being there "in the way" hinders F2, then that by itself would constitute INT.

Regarding this: no play on the BR can be a force play, and we try to be precise about that. You are correct that no run can score when the batter makes the 3rd out before safely reaching 1B.

Otherwise, good post!

​F3 doesn't need to demonstrate control "by voluntary release". He just needs demonstrate control by not dropping the ball.

[noumpere]

Did the batter swing?

 

Did the catcher "drop" the ball (after catching it) or did the catcher not catch the ball?  If it was the latter, then no "safe" sign / verbal is needed if it was obvious.

 

I find it a little hard to believe that the umpire would not make any signal or vocalization on a called third strike (even if it was uncaught)

 

 

[Rich Ives]

Did the batter swing?

 

Did the catcher "drop" the ball (after catching it) or did the catcher not catch the ball?  If it was the latter, then no "safe" sign / verbal is needed if it was obvious.

 

I find it a little hard to believe that the umpire would not make any signal or vocalization on a called third strike (even if it was uncaught)

 

 

​ALWAYS signal and verbalize "no catch". The batter has his back to the play. It is NOT obvious to him.

[noumpere]

​ALWAYS signal and verbalize "no catch". The batter has his back to the play. It is NOT obvious to him.

​Sometimes it bounces in front of the plate.  Sometimes it goes to the backstop.  Sometimes it kicks out up the line toward first.  All those are obivous, even if the batter is Stevie Wonder.

[JaxRolo]

When you are going to "pick apart" an OP you need to know what you are saying.

Edited June 29, 2015 by JaxRolo

[Rich Ives]

​Sometimes it bounces in front of the plate.  Sometimes it goes to the backstop.  Sometimes it kicks out up the line toward first.  All those are obivous, even if the batter is Stevie Wonder.

​Some are. Some aren't. You can attempt to mind-read the batter and catcher OR you can just always verbalize "no catch" and thus eliminate any confusion. Somehow I think the latter is the preferred method.

And I doubt Stevie would be batting.

[Jimurray]

​Some are. Some aren't. You can attempt to mind-read the batter and catcher OR you can just always verbalize "no catch" and thus eliminate any confusion. Somehow I think the latter is the preferred method.

And I doubt Stevie would be batting.

My experience is most are obvious and the catcher and batter are doing what they should be doing as I am giving the safe signal. The verbal is only needed on a non obvious such as a trap. As an aside, I believe MLB umps signal with a right arm point.

[Rich Ives]

My experience is most are obvious and the catcher and batter are doing what they should be doing as I am giving the safe signal. The verbal is only needed on a non obvious such as a trap. As an aside, I believe MLB umps signal with a right arm point.

​The right arm point is "strike"

They also signal "safe" and verbalize "no catch".

Get into the habit of always verbalizing. No decisions required. Just do it.  Then you won't forget when, in your hindsight, you should have.

[Jimurray]

​The right arm point is "strike"

They also signal "safe" and verbalize "no catch".

Get into the habit of always verbalizing. No decisions required. Just do it.  Then you won't forget when, in your hindsight, you should have.

​When it's a "no sht" sit it's not needed:

http://m.mlb.com/video/v125321883/oaktb-souza-jr-reaches-on-dropped-third-strike/?query=reaches+first+strike

http://m.mlb.com/video/v96069083/cinatl-hamilton-strikes-out-reaches-on-passed-ball/?query=reaches+strike

 

[ShotKaller]

​Regarding this: on a third strike not legally caught, signal "safe" AND verbalize "no catch!" We need a verbal here because the two people who most need to know our ruling of no catch are the BR and F2, neither of whom is likely to be looking at us.

Regarding this: the batter is NOT entitled to remain in the box. He is required by rule to vacate any space needed by the defense to play on R3 (in this case). Your caveat about "unless INT occurred" seems to suggest that the batter must do something to be liable for INT, but that's incorrect: since he is not entitled to be there, if his merely being there "in the way" hinders F2, then that by itself would constitute INT.

Regarding this: no play on the BR can be a force play, and we try to be precise about that. You are correct that no run can score when the batter makes the 3rd out before safely reaching 1B.

Otherwise, good post!

In response: ​I don't ever verbalize "no catch" on DTS. Blame it on my training, or personal preference, but it is a choice. IMO it is the same as non-verbal on a "fair ball". The only two people on the field that could get a better look than me are F2 and the BR. BR should be moving if he was watching the pitch. The signal is for the infielders, and my partner(s) so they can react to my ruling on the play. The only verbal in this situation would be if it WAS a catch and the batter started running down to first with runners on base. Now you will get the strike call, and a loud, "That's a catch, batter is out!" to ensure F2 doesn't throw the ball away unnecessarily. 

Question: So you are saying the batter is automatically out for interference by remaining in the box and R3 is returned to third? I think you better get your crew together on that ruling. The batter is not subject to a penalty for simply occupying the box. He is only subject to penalty if being there interferes with a play on R3. He can just as easily be called out for interference for stepping out of the box into F2's throw or into F2 making a tag, even if it is unintentional. To be clear, my statement says the batter is entitled to remain in the box because the question mentioned the batter being in the box as though it had an automatic penalty associated with it. At no time did I mean to imply the batters box was "safe haven" as so many of our "helpers" in the stands often cry out.  In any case he IS entitled to stay in the box if he so chooses. While he is more likely to be called out for interference by staying there, he is not any less liable for interference if he is one step, or twenty steps, out of the box. I'm thinking the word "entitlement" may be putting us at odds here, but I wanted to be clear. A runner is also "entitled" to run from first base to right field make a figure eight and then proceed to second. He may be called out for many reasons, but he is still entitled to do so.

Regarding this: My apologies. I swear to do my next 10 plate games without insoles as penance for this fatal oversight.  

[ShotKaller]

When you are going to "pick apart" an OP you need to know what you are saying.

​Great advice. Quality contribution. 

[ShotKaller]

​F3 doesn't need to demonstrate control "by voluntary release". He just needs demonstrate control by not dropping the ball.

Did you come to this conclusion on your own?

Read with me son:

​Rule 2.00 (Catch):  A CATCH is the act of a fielder in getting secure possession in his hand or glove of a ball in flight and firmly holding it; providing he does not use his cap, protector, pocket or any other part of his uniform in getting possession. It is not a catch, however, if simultaneously or immediately following his contact with the ball, he collides with a player, or with a wall, or if he falls down, and as a result of such collision or falling, drops the ball. It is not a catch if a fielder touches a fly ball which then hits a member of the offensive team or an umpire and then is caught by another defensive player. If the fielder has made the catch and drops the ball while in the act of making a throw following the catch, the ball shall be adjudged to have been caught. In establishing the validity of the catch, the fielder shall hold the ball long enough to prove that he has complete control of the ball and that his release of the ball is voluntary and intentional.

[JaxRolo]

Did you come to this conclusion on your own?

Read with me son:

​Rule 2.00 (Catch):  A CATCH is the act of a fielder in getting secure possession in his hand or glove of a ball in flight and firmly holding it; providing he does not use his cap, protector, pocket or any other part of his uniform in getting possession. It is not a catch, however, if simultaneously or immediately following his contact with the ball, he collides with a player, or with a wall, or if he falls down, and as a result of such collision or falling, drops the ball. It is not a catch if a fielder touches a fly ball which then hits a member of the offensive team or an umpire and then is caught by another defensive player. If the fielder has made the catch and drops the ball while in the act of making a throw following the catch, the ball shall be adjudged to have been caught. In establishing the validity of the catch, the fielder shall hold the ball long enough to prove that he has complete control of the ball and that his release of the ball is voluntary and intentional.

​A catch on a batted ball is different than a catch on a put out.

By the way your attitude really sucks!

[catsbackr]

Who's father is this guy?

 

Oh, and if you don't ever verbalize on a dropped third strike, you're an idiot.  Sorry, I shouldn't have said that, I meant stupid.

[maven]

In response: ​I don't ever verbalize "no catch" on DTS. Blame it on my training, or personal preference, but it is a choice. IMO it is the same as non-verbal on a "fair ball". The only two people on the field that could get a better look than me are F2 and the BR. BR should be moving if he was watching the pitch. The signal is for the infielders, and my partner(s) so they can react to my ruling on the play. The only verbal in this situation would be if it WAS a catch and the batter started running down to first with runners on base. Now you will get the strike call, and a loud, "That's a catch, batter is out!" to ensure F2 doesn't throw the ball away unnecessarily. 

Question: So you are saying the batter is automatically out for interference by remaining in the box and R3 is returned to third? I think you better get your crew together on that ruling. The batter is not subject to a penalty for simply occupying the box. He is only subject to penalty if being there interferes with a play on R3. He can just as easily be called out for interference for stepping out of the box into F2's throw or into F2 making a tag, even if it is unintentional. To be clear, my statement says the batter is entitled to remain in the box because the question mentioned the batter being in the box as though it had an automatic penalty associated with it. At no time did I mean to imply the batters box was "safe haven" as so many of our "helpers" in the stands often cry out.  In any case he IS entitled to stay in the box if he so chooses. While he is more likely to be called out for interference by staying there, he is not any less liable for interference if he is one step, or twenty steps, out of the box. I'm thinking the word "entitlement" may be putting us at odds here, but I wanted to be clear. A runner is also "entitled" to run from first base to right field make a figure eight and then proceed to second. He may be called out for many reasons, but he is still entitled to do so.

Regarding this: My apologies. I swear to do my next 10 plate games without insoles as penance for this fatal oversight.  

​1. There is no verbal for "fair ball," since any verbalization on a batted ball down a line is likely to be interpreted as "foul ball." This mechanic is non-optional. In contrast, we have an option regarding whether to verbalize something when F2 fails to catch a third strike. As noumpere pointed out, sometimes we don't need to (ball goes to the backstop). I provided reasons for verbalizing in the other cases. As I said, the verbalization is for the 2 players who can't see you. Your rationale of signaling only to your partner and the infielders seems to prioritize the wrong people. It's not about "personal preference," nor assessing blame. We all want to get better, and better mechanics yield better calls. If you think your mechanic is better, I hope I'm open minded enough to try to understand why: mechanics do change over time as experience shows what works best. So far, I haven't seen a good reason to stop verbalizing for the sake of the batter and F2.

2. Claiming that the batter is entitled to stay in the box is a half-truth, as your recent clarification shows. He's "entitled" to remain in the box, but he's "more likely to be called out for interference if he stays there"? That makes no sense: to be entitled to do something means that it's no violation to do it. By that logic, R1 is "entitled" to crash into F4 fielding a batted ball, though doing so makes it more likely he'll be called out for interference.

The batter INT rule is complex, and efforts to "boil it down" in my experience end up over-simplifying it and saying something incorrect or misleading. The black letter rule requires members of the team at bat, including the batter, to vacate any space required by the defense to make a play. I don't think we help anyone understand that rule better by suggesting that the batter is always entitled to stay in the box with R3 stealing. In some cases yes (R3 arrives moments after the pitch), in some, no (wild pitch gets away from F2 and F1 covers).

[Guest]

Just as a point of clarification: The batter did not swing.  The ball hit the catcher's glove and then fell to the ground.  It was a close call and could have either been a ball or a strike.

Thanks for the answers; they are much appreciated and interesting.

[ShotKaller]

​A catch on a batted ball is different than a catch on a put out.
By the way your attitude really sucks!

​WTF? This is twice now you have offered an insult, and nothing of substance @JaxRolo. If I wanted to sit around and talk SH*# I would go on twitter. It's more helpful to hear why you were right, than to hear how I was wrong. How do you validate a catch on a put out? 

[Jimurray]

​The right arm point is "strike"

They also signal "safe" and verbalize "no catch".

Get into the habit of always verbalizing. No decisions required. Just do it.  Then you won't forget when, in your hindsight, you should have.

​The right arm point is used by some and the safe by others:

http://m.mlb.com/video/v35901015/pitstl-bourjos-reaches-first-after-striking-out/?query=reaches+strike

[Jimurray]

Did you come to this conclusion on your own?

Read with me son:

​Rule 2.00 (Catch):  A CATCH is the act of a fielder in getting secure possession in his hand or glove of a ball in flight and firmly holding it; providing he does not use his cap, protector, pocket or any other part of his uniform in getting possession. It is not a catch, however, if simultaneously or immediately following his contact with the ball, he collides with a player, or with a wall, or if he falls down, and as a result of such collision or falling, drops the ball. It is not a catch if a fielder touches a fly ball which then hits a member of the offensive team or an umpire and then is caught by another defensive player. If the fielder has made the catch and drops the ball while in the act of making a throw following the catch, the ball shall be adjudged to have been caught. In establishing the validity of the catch, the fielder shall hold the ball long enough to prove that he has complete control of the ball and that his release of the ball is voluntary and intentional.

​Great to see that you are reading the definitions but you need to continue reading through the Ts where you will find the definition of a TAG. The wording "in establishing ..." is in there but voluntary release is not.

BTW, Rule 2.00 is now "The Playing Field". Definitions is a unnumbered chapter ahead of the apendices.

[JaxRolo]

​WTF? This is twice now you have offered an insult, and nothing of substance @JaxRolo. If I wanted to sit around and talk SH*# I would go on twitter. It's more helpful to hear why you were right, than to hear how I was wrong. How do you validate a catch on a put out? 

You answer post with smartass, rude and incorrect answers then you get mad when someone calls you out???

nice

[LMSANS]

This topic is done.