Jump to content

Anyone see the LSU Army HBP

GPblue

By GPblue
in Collegiate

 Share
Umpire-Empire locks topics which have not been active in the last year. The thread you are viewing hasn't been active in 2624 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.

Recommended Posts

GPblue

GPblue

Posted
Posted

Apendex E. 2.i.  This means in video review the ENTIRETY of a HBP can be reviewed, including moving into pitch?

 

Anyone else have anything different?

  • Replies 39
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Jimurray
Jimurray

From the horses mouth:   

umpstu
umpstu

Don't see any controversy with this call at all.  Batter clearly hit the ball with his elbow/arm.  

Jimurray
Jimurray

I think the "or" phrase applied here: "a) If the ball is in the strike zone when it touches the batter, or if the batter moves to intentionally get hit or freezes to allow a pitch that is not with

umpstu

umpstu

Posted
Posted

Don't see any controversy with this call at all.  Batter clearly hit the ball with his elbow/arm.

 

  • Like 2
Thunderheads

Thunderheads

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, umpstu said:

Don't see any controversy with this call at all.  Batter clearly hit the ball with his elbow/arm.

 

ok, but you see he called it a strike because his elbow was in the zone?

Jimurray

Jimurray

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Thunderheads said:

ok, but you see he called it a strike because his elbow was in the zone?

No a strike is added to the count when the batter intentionally gets HBP. But the HC gets ejected for ignoring the "don't come out" and argue. Did an assistant then ask for video review?

Thunderheads

Thunderheads

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

No a strike is added to the count when the batter intentionally gets HBP. But the HC gets ejected for ignoring the "don't come out" and argue. Did an assistant then ask for video review?

Thanks Jim!  I did NOT know that!!  I understand the EJ however ....

Well then ... that makes PERFECT SENSE .......no controversy there!

  • Like 1
umpstu

umpstu

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Thunderheads said:

ok, but you see he called it a strike because his elbow was in the zone?

Yes.

Jimurray

Jimurray

Posted
Posted
Just now, Thunderheads said:

Thanks Jim!  I did NOT know that!!  I understand the EJ however ....

Well then ... that makes PERFECT SENSE .......no controversy there!

Was that a 7 or 9 inning game? If 7 the PU could initiate his own review. Otherwise who requested the review, the ejected HC or an assistant?

 

Jimurray

Jimurray

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, umpstu said:

Yes.

I think the "or" phrase applied here: "a) If the ball is in the strike zone when it touches the batter, or if the
batter moves to intentionally get hit or freezes to allow a pitch that is
not within the batter's box to hit him, the ball is dead, it shall be called
a strike and the batter is not awarded first base."

  • Like 2
Thunderheads

Thunderheads

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

Was that a 7 or 9 inning game? If 7 the PU could initiate his own review. Otherwise who requested the review, the ejected HC or an assistant?

 

that I don't know .......

Gfoley4

Gfoley4

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

I think the "or" phrase applied here: "a) If the ball is in the strike zone when it touches the batter, or if the
batter moves to intentionally get hit or freezes to allow a pitch that is
not within the batter's box to hit him, the ball is dead, it shall be called
a strike and the batter is not awarded first base."

interesting, is this only a NCAA rule? and you could still make the case that the ball was in the batter's box I suppose

Thunderheads

Thunderheads

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, GPblue said:

The HBP was in the strike zone?

no ...read the rule jimurray posted:

I think the "or" phrase applied here: "a) If the ball is in the strike zone when it touches the batter, or if the
batter moves to intentionally get hit or freezes to allow a pitch that is
not within the batter's box to hit him, the ball is dead, it shall be called
a strike and the batter is not awarded first base."

Jimurray

Jimurray

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Gfoley4 said:

interesting, is this only a NCAA rule? and you could still make the case that the ball was in the batter's box I suppose

NCAA only. If the pitch was in the box freezing would be allowed but that did not happen. The "or if the batter moves to intentionally get hit" happened and was confirmed by video review. 

  • Thanks 1
GPblue

GPblue

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 hours ago, Thunderheads said:

ok, but you see he called it a strike because his elbow was in the zone?

no ...read the rule jimurray posted:

I think the "or" phrase applied here: "a) If the ball is in the strike zone when it touches the batter, or if the
batter moves to intentionally get hit or freezes to allow a pitch that is
not within the batter's box to hit him, the ball is dead, it shall be called
a strike and the batter is not awarded first base."

 

?????

humanbackstop19

humanbackstop19

Posted
Posted

So, with this being a reviewable call when technology permits, is this now an acceptable play for a crew to get together where the technology is NOT present at the lower levels of college baseball (ie - DII, DIII, JUCO, NAIA)?  

kylehutson

kylehutson

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, dumbdumb said:

So the strike zone for intentionally getting hit expands to 29 inches in/out. How much does it expand up and down, nose to toes.

As far as a batter can move and still get hit intentionally.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
umpstu

umpstu

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, dumbdumb said:

So the strike zone for intentionally getting hit expands to 29 inches in/out. How much does it expand up and down, nose to toes.

Nothing to do with the strike zone.  It has to do with the batter getting hit intentionally.

  • Like 1
Kevin_K

Kevin_K

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, humanbackstop19 said:

So, with this being a reviewable call when technology permits, is this now an acceptable play for a crew to get together where the technology is NOT present at the lower levels of college baseball (ie - DII, DIII, JUCO, NAIA)?  

According to the Appendix E Section 1.b:

An umpire is urged to seek help when his view is blocked or positioning prevents him from seeing crucial elements of a play.  An umpire is also encouraged to seek help in instances when he has any doubt and a partner has additional information that could lead to the proper ruling.

If I am PU and I am not sure, I would ask my partner(s). If my partners had information for me I would hope that they would embrace Appendix E 1.c and approach me unsolicited to alert me to such information. I know I would do the same.

The philosophy has definitively moved toward getting it right rather than sticking with the initial call. 

  • Like 1
dumbdumb

dumbdumb

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, umpstu said:

Nothing to do with the strike zone.  It has to do with the batter getting hit intentionally.

So, intentionally get hit within the batters box is a ball, and unintentionally hit within the batters box is a hbp?

Forest Ump

Forest Ump

Posted
Posted

From the NCAA Central Hub:

•Hit By Pitch –7-4-i, 8-2-d-1

•A batter who, in the judgment of the umpire, makes a movement to intentionally get hit by the pitch, is not awarded first base and a strike is added to the count, regardless of the location of the pitch.

•“Freezing” is not considered making a movement to be hit by the pitch if the pitch is within the batter’s box. Getting hit by a pitch within the batter’s box without making any movement would allow the batter to be awarded first base.

•This judgment by the umpire cannot be argued. (3-6-f-Notes 1 and 2).

•If video review is being utilized, a coach could use one of his challenges to have this situation reviewed. (App. E-2)

 

 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...