Batter catches the pitch

[coachump4]

• For the first time ever in 10 years was umpiring a "really bad" game where the score was 16-4 6th inning and bases loaded with 2 outs count was 3-2 and had a batter catch the pitch.  The pitch would had either went behind him or hit him.  I was the BU and the PU was a rookie that wasn't sure what to call.  We met and I had never seen it and really wasn't sure either.  We decided to call him out for interfering with a live pitch.  After conferring with more veteran umpires it was determined it should be called depending on where the ball was at and he should had been awarded 1st base.  I admit I screwed up but had never seen nothing like this before nor heard of anything like this before.  Has anyone had this situation before?

[maven]

1. He's definitely not out: no rule supports that.
2. It's not a HBP, as he permitted the ball to hit him (or the equivalent).
3. That leaves calling the pitch, probably a ball.
4. Also, the ball is dead when it touches the batter, so any runners attempting to advance would have to return.
5. Tell him not to do that.

[Minnz]

19 minutes ago, maven said:

1.  
2. It's not a HBP, as he permitted the ball to hit him (or the equivalent).

I could disagree with this. If he attempted to get out of the way and in self defense caught the ball as the reaction as he attempted to get out of the way we could have a HBP.

[ricka56]

 

53 minutes ago, coachump4 said:

• ... was umpiring a "really bad" game where the score was 16-4 6th inning ...Has anyone had this situation before?

I'd give you points for originality. And if I was your partner, I'd buy the first round. 

[ALStripes17]

 

I'd give you points for originality. And if I was your partner, I'd buy the first round. 

Due to the score not being as bad as what most of us have seen? Seeing as I just came off a Varsity DH with scores of 22-2 and 20-0

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[ElkOil]

10 hours ago, Minnz said:

I could disagree with this. If he attempted to get out of the way and in self defense caught the ball as the reaction as he attempted to get out of the way we could have a HBP.

In FED, the batter must not permit the ball to hit him (I assume this was a FED game?). This clearly violates that rule. So call a dead ball, add a ball to the count, keep the batter in the box and play on.

[ALStripes17]

In FED, the batter must not permit the ball to hit him (I assume this was a FED game?). This clearly violates that rule. So call a dead ball, add a ball to the count, keep the batter in the box and play on.

So instinctively catching it out in front of him rather than letting it square him up in the back is an automatic violation? Come on Elk... This scenario isn't 100% exclusive. That's where he was getting at.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[ZebraStripes]

7 hours ago, ElkOil said:

In FED, the batter must not permit the ball to hit him (I assume this was a FED game?). This clearly violates that rule. So call a dead ball, add a ball to the count, keep the batter in the box and play on.

You call a ball and keep the batter in the box?  That will be tough to explain a 4-2 count and keeping him in the box 

[ElkOil]

3 hours ago, ZebraStripes said:

You call a ball and keep the batter in the box?  That will be tough to explain a 4-2 count and keeping him in the box 

Pfft, You've never seen me call a ballgame. I'll make a count 8-6, 10-4, 5-5... whatever it takes.

[ElkOil]

5 hours ago, ALStripes17 said:

So instinctively catching it out in front of him rather than letting it square him up in the back is an automatic violation? Come on Elk... This scenario isn't 100% exclusive. That's where he was getting at.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

It happened in a game I did earlier this year. With a 2-1 count, the batter got scared at a curve ball and stuck his hand out to stop it. I killed it, added ball to the count and we played on. I don't see a provision that allows us to do otherwise. Would you not call a strike on a batter that tries to avoid a pitch by leaning over the plate, then gets hit by the ball in the strike zone?

[ALStripes17]

It happened in a game I did earlier this year. With a 2-1 count, the batter got scared at a curve ball and stuck his hand out to stop it. I killed it, added ball to the count and we played on. I don't see a provision that allows us to do otherwise. Would you not call a strike on a batter that tries to avoid a pitch by leaning over the plate, then gets hit by the ball in the strike zone?

My point was that this scenario does not 'clearly violate the rule...'

Sticking a hand out over the plate or into a position where the pitch wasn't going to hit you anyway is a violation. A pitch coming at you and putting your hand out so you feel the pain on your palm rather than your back is not necessarily in violation.

I even made the comment that it's not 100%! Come on Elk.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[ElkOil]

1 minute ago, ALStripes17 said:

My point was that this scenario does not 'clearly violate the rule...'

Sticking a hand out over the plate or into a position where the pitch wasn't going to hit you anyway is a violation. A pitch coming at you and putting your hand out so you feel the pain on your palm rather than your back is not necessarily in violation.

I even made the comment that it's not 100%! Come on Elk.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Hey, call it however you like when you see it. Maybe I'd call it differently in a live game, but for this, it's just words on our computer screens. When the defensive coach asks about it, he'll have a valid point, though.

[FleasOf1000Camels]

"Ball 4. TIME! Take your base."

[grayhawk]

6 hours ago, FleasOf1000Camels said:

"TIME! Ball 4."

FYP

[ZOOX]

In this sitch, ball 4, award first, easy call with 3 ball count.  Otherwise with less than 3 balls, still a ball as he didn't make an attempt to avoid the pitch (from what I can gather from my own experience). 

[aiber]

It happened in a game I did earlier this year. With a 2-1 count, the batter got scared at a curve ball and stuck his hand out to stop it. I killed it, added ball to the count and we played on. I don't see a provision that allows us to do otherwise. Would you not call a strike on a batter that tries to avoid a pitch by leaning over the plate, then gets hit by the ball in the strike zone?

The example quoted is a HBP.

[jlutgen0]

Change of scenario but imagine with me. Batter sees a big looping curve ball coming at his front shoulder and reaches out toward the pitcher and catches it. Pitch very well could have moved into the zone, but was caught well outside of the zone. Are you going to give benefit of the doubt to the pitcher and award a strike or the batter that caught a live ball? 

[Replacematt]

1 hour ago, jlutgen0 said:

Change of scenario but imagine with me. Batter sees a big looping curve ball coming at his front shoulder and reaches out toward the pitcher and catches it. Pitch very well could have moved into the zone, but was caught well outside of the zone. Are you going to give benefit of the doubt to the pitcher and award a strike or the batter that caught a live ball? 

What doubt? It's a ball. Maybe it would have gotten to the zone, but I have no basis to call it a strike. I can only get a strike if I can sell one here.

[JSam21]

On ‎4‎/‎6‎/‎2016 at 10:53 AM, ElkOil said:

Pfft, You've never seen me call a ballgame. I'll make a count 8-6, 10-4, 5-5... whatever it takes.

220...221

[umpire_scott]

10 hours ago, Matt said:

What doubt? It's a ball. Maybe it would have gotten to the zone, but I have no basis to call it a strike. I can only get a strike if I can sell one here.

What basis do you have for calling it a ball if it never got to the plate at all?  That would seem to imply that all batters can catch pitches before they get to the catcher so they don't get to the plate and potentially become strikes.

[Replacematt]

Just now, umpire_scott said:

What basis do you have for calling it a ball if it never got to the plate at all?  That would seem to imply that all batters can catch pitches before they get to the catcher so they don't get to the plate and potentially become strikes.

Because it's not a strike. The rules define a strike; any legal pitch that is not a strike is a ball.

[umpire_scott]

4 minutes ago, Matt said:

Because it's not a strike. The rules define a strike; any legal pitch that is not a strike is a ball.

But that would imply that batters can just reach out in front of the plate and allow pitches to hit them, and they would legally be balls because they have not reached the plate yet.. I thought there was verbiage about not allowing a pitch to enter the strike zone?

[LittleBlue]

5 minutes ago, umpire_scott said:

But that would imply that batters can just reach out in front of the plate and allow pitches to hit them, and they would legally be balls because they have not reached the plate yet.. I thought there was verbiage about not allowing a pitch to enter the strike zone?

If he did it more than once I would give him a very stern warning to stop interfering with the pitches and if he didn't he would likely be ejected. That's just me though.

[LittleBlue]

Speaking of batters catching pitches or putting their hand up to block a pitch, I had a situation in a game I worked about a month ago where a 10u batter was overmatched by a hard throwing pitcher. The pitcher let one get away and it came right at the batters head. His reaction was to turn away and put his hand in front of his face. The ball hit his hand/forearm and down he went. Both coaches came out to see if he was ok but once the DHC checked on him he complained to me that the batter clearly tried to interfere with the pitch. I said he didn't because he was trying to protect himself. DHC maintained that the batter intentionally tried catch the ball. Batter was given first and we played on with no further incident. Anything to win I guess.

[umpire_scott]

13 minutes ago, LittleBlue said:

If he did it more than once I would give him a very stern warning to stop interfering with the pitches and if he didn't he would likely be ejected. That's just me though.

I agree that if he did it more than once I would say something.  But if I were the defensive coach I would have a huge problem with a batter interfering with a pitch that had a chance at being called a strike if not for the batter interfering with it.  I would feel like a real tool if I explained to him "Sorry coach but unless it's a strike it's a ball, and since the ball never got to home plate it's not a strike.  If he does it again I'll warn or eject, but for this pitch it's a ball".