Is This a Hit By Pitch

[SavoyBG]

Had a play tonight that I think should technically have been a hit by pitch. SH*#ty 14U game. Pitcher throws a pitch that is real high. The catcher does not touch the ball at all. The ball hits the backstop behind the catcher, and ricochets back and hits the batter from behind. The ball did not touch the catcher or me (the umpire). I just left the ball in play and called nothing, but according to the rule as to when a pitch ends, that would still be a pitch when it hit the batter.

 

 

[maven]

10 hours ago, SavoyBG said:

The high school rule book defines when a pitch is over.

2-28-4

A pitch ends when the pitched ball:

A - Is secured by the catcher

B - comes to rest

C - goes out of play

D - becomes dead

E - the batter hits the ball (other than a foul tip).

That rule applies to judging the status of the ball when it leaves the field. It's a pitched ball until one of those things occurs. After that, it's a batted or thrown ball (if live) or dead.

It's a mistake to apply that to HBP. Would you allow the batter to go over and hit the 'pitch' rolling down the 3BL? If not, then don't rule the carom a HBP.

[Lou B]

It's not a hit by pitch once it goes past the batter.  

[SavoyBG]

1 minute ago, Lou B said:

It's not a hit by pitch once it goes past the batter.  

According to what rule?

[Lou B]

The definition of a pitch is a ball "delivered" to a batter.  Once the ball has passed the batter/reached the catcher it is no longer being "delivered" to the batter. It's already been "delivered"!

[SavoyBG]

33 minutes ago, Lou B said:

The definition of a pitch is a ball "delivered" to a batter.  Once the ball has passed the batter/reached the catcher it is no longer being "delivered" to the batter. It's already been "delivered"!

The high school rule book defines when a pitch is over.

2-28-4

A pitch ends when the pitched ball:

A - Is secured by the catcher

B - comes to rest

C - goes out of play

D - becomes dead

E - the batter hits the ball (other than a foul tip).

 

 

[Rich Ives]

1 hour ago, SavoyBG said:

The high school rule book defines when a pitch is over.

2-28-4

A pitch ends when the pitched ball:

A - Is secured by the catcher

B - comes to rest

C - goes out of play

D - becomes dead

E - the batter hits the ball (other than a foul tip).

 

 

Don't go there. Don't even think about it.

[noumpere]

10 hours ago, SavoyBG said:

The high school rule book defines when a pitch is over.

2-28-4

A pitch ends when the pitched ball:

A - Is secured by the catcher

B - comes to rest

C - goes out of play

D - becomes dead

E - the batter hits the ball (other than a foul tip).

 

 

Yes, but a batter isn't awarded first when he's hit by a "pitch."  He's awarded first when "a pitched ball hits his person or clothing."

 

Note the difference.

[SavoyBG]

One interpreter got back to me and said...

Bruce,
        Something crazy always happens in baseball!  Yes, the pitch still meets the definition of a pitch; however, your play would not be an HBP.  Good no call!  I base my answer on the fact that the batter had his opportunity to hit the baseball, and that ended as soon as the ball/pitch got by the catcher and ultimately struck the backstop.  Suppose you had a situation where a pitched ball careened from the umpire and then somehow hit the batter?  Again, no HBP, but the definition of pitch is still in effect until, by rule, it is no longer a pitch.  I believe that you should make your call/ruling by citing Rule #10, in which (we) can make decisions even though they are not clearly delineated in the rules book.  Perhaps, this would be a Situation which should be added to the NFHS Case Book.

[beerguy55]

15 hours ago, SavoyBG said:

The high school rule book defines when a pitch is over.

2-28-4

A pitch ends when the pitched ball:

A - Is secured by the catcher

B - comes to rest

C - goes out of play

D - becomes dead

E - the batter hits the ball (other than a foul tip).

 

 

Further to noumpere's point, the batter can't swing and hit that pitch that careens off the backstop, catcher or umpire either.   

[ArchAngel72]

If that were true than the catcher would be able to catch balls bouncing off the fence for an out.

 

No not a HBP

 

[Kersh]

It is still a live ball and in play. The batter is not awarded first by a Hit by Pitch, because the ball hit something in the field of play other than the ground, in this case the backstop.

The same ruling would apply if it hit the catcher's mitt, or any of his protective gear and ricocheted  back hitting the batter.

[Guest Crazy Me]

The ball hit an unnatural object - the wall that separates in-play from out-of-play.   Once a pitched or batted ball touches an unnatural object it can no longer be caught for an out.  It's status has changed.

[SavoyBG]

10 hours ago, Kersh said:

It is still a live ball and in play. The batter is not awarded first by a Hit by Pitch, because the ball hit something in the field of play other than the ground, in this case the backstop.

 

A - Where does it say that in the rule book?

B - The plate is not the ground. If the pitch hits the plate and then directly hits the batter, is THAT a hit by pitch?

[beerguy55]

28 minutes ago, SavoyBG said:

A - Where does it say that in the rule book?

B - The plate is not the ground. If the pitch hits the plate and then directly hits the batter, is THAT a hit by pitch?

The plate, bases and rubber are part of the ground.

 

On 7/17/2019 at 7:13 AM, noumpere said:

Yes, but a batter isn't awarded first when he's hit by a "pitch."  He's awarded first when "a pitched ball hits his person or clothing."

 

Note the difference.

Yes, but the baserunning awards table uses "pitch", as in "hit by pitch".

The FED rule book seems to use them interchangeably and if one were to take the rule book literally it would be confusing, as I think SavoyBg is trying to do...it defines the life of a "pitch", but not a "pitched ball"...but the definition of a pitch contains "pitched ball".

There are base running awards based on a pitch, or pitched ball going out of play...and the definition of a "pitch" is what determines if that ball that went out of play was a "pitched ball" or something else.

To me, the definition of a "pitch", and where a "pitch" ends, is applicable to awards as a result of the ball going out of play....pitched ball vs batted ball vs thrown (kicked/redirected) ball

But I don't think there's one way to wrap in a bow a clean definition of either a pitch, or a pitched ball, or both, to cover all technicalities.

1. There is a standard for a pitch when it goes out of play.
2. There is a standard for a pitch, in determining the point when a batter can no longer swing to get a U3K, or get hit by a pitch, or bat the ball (but it's still a pitch for the purposes of going out of play)
3. There is a standard for a pitch in determining the catcher's ability to catch a third strike. (and sometimes this lines up with point 2 and sometimes it doesn't)

And I don't think you can cleanly define and apply black and white terminology, especially against the second two because there is overlap (eg. a pitch that touches the catcher can still be caught for a third strike, or go out of play as a pitch, but can't be batted or ruled a HBP).

At that point, it's all about common sense and understanding the spirit of the game.  You can't follow the literal definitions.

There are fundamentals to the game, but if people interpret the rules in a fundamentalist fashion they'll go insane.

[The Man in Blue]

Before I step into something that I will need to clean off my plate shoes, let me say that I agree it should not be a hit by pitch.

Now, for the fun ... I have expressed this before and I will say it again ... I get a kick out of the picking and choosing when folks around here  are going to be literal and when they take it upon themselves.

Again ... I wouldn’t it call it, but Savoy has a point.

[noumpere]

14 minutes ago, The Man in Blue said:

Now, for the fun ... I have expressed this before and I will say it again ... I get a kick out of the picking and choosing when folks around here  are going to be literal and when they take it upon themselves.

It's part of the art of umpiring.  And, it applies to most other professions as well.

As someone put it:  The rules are written by gentlemen, for gentlemen; not by lawyers, for lawyers.

[ArchAngel72]

23 hours ago, SavoyBG said:

A - Where does it say that in the rule book?

B - The plate is not the ground. If the pitch hits the plate and then directly hits the batter, is THAT a hit by pitch?

 

 

On B.  

I am having a hard time figuring out how a ball could deflect off the plate and hit the batter but lets just say the most insane curve is low and hits the front corner of the plate takes an odd bounce and hits the batter without being a strike as it hit the front corner of the plate, then yeah hit by pitch

Its a completely weird bounce but yeah hit by pitch

[JSam21]

23 hours ago, SavoyBG said:

A - Where does it say that in the rule book?

B - The plate is not the ground. If the pitch hits the plate and then directly hits the batter, is THAT a hit by pitch?

The plate is part of "the grounds".... 

 

[Aging_Arbiter]

55 minutes ago, noumpere said:

not by lawyers, for lawyers

Ever read the LL rulebook with all of the safety infusions?   LOL

 

[The Man in Blue]

2 hours ago, noumpere said:

It's part of the art of umpiring.  And, it applies to most other professions as well.

As someone put it:  The rules are written by gentlemen, for gentlemen; not by lawyers, for lawyers.

 

I agree it is part of the art, and I love these conversations!  I’ll apologize now if anybody gets offended (as they have in the past).

 

This is where I diverge with many here ... because it is an art, if Savoy had awarded the base, we couldn’t say he is wrong.  Many here will say that is wrong, but the rules support the decision.  Is it a wise decision?  That’s a different question.  The question at hand is do the rules support or not support it?  Where we get into the art is in crafting our decision when the rules are at odds or are lacking.  I can say “I wouldn’t have called it that way” but I cannot say “That is wrong”.

Once upon a time the statement of gentlemen and lawyers may have been correct.  I don’t think it is today.  

Another issue I (think I) see is that rules are changed and lifted from other sources without a full look at the impact on other rules that may conflict or adjoin to the situation.

The easy answer to this conundrum is to add to the definition “when the pitch contacts anything other than the ground or the bat”.

[SavoyBG]

15 hours ago, ArchAngel72 said:

 

 

On B.  

I am having a hard time figuring out how a ball could deflect off the plate and hit the batter

 

I've had it happen. We are not playing in major league ballparks. Lots of these fields have plates that stick up above the ground and balls take crazy bounces off of them. The time it happened trhe ball hit the plate and came up and hit the batter and bloodied his face.

[Senor Azul]

Mr. SavoyBG, you identified the level of play in your game as 14U and did not mention which rule set the game was played under. You then went on to quote a FED definition of when a pitch ends (from rule 2-28-4). But that FED rule is not universal. In fact, OBR has nothing similar in its rule book. Fortunately for us it does have an official interpretation that can be found in the 2016 BRD (section 378, p. 254) (emphasis added):

OBR Official Interpretation:  Wendelstedt:  The pitch ends when the ball delivered by the pitcher is either caught by the catcher, is hit by the batter, touches the batter before being deflected, or goes (or would have gone) out of play on its own or its deflected momentum. (2013 WRIM, p. 8)

[catsbackr]

18 hours ago, SavoyBG said:

I've had it happen. We are not playing in major league ballparks. Lots of these fields have plates that stick up above the ground and balls take crazy bounces off of them. The time it happened trhe ball hit the plate and came up and hit the batter and bloodied his face.

I guess he was kind of deep in the batter's box, huh?  

 

I mean for the ball to hit the plate and bounce straight up to hit the batter in the face.  After being thrown from the mound.  With any speed at all.

[SavoyBG]

2 hours ago, catsbackr said:

I guess he was kind of deep in the batter's box, huh?  

 

I mean for the ball to hit the plate and bounce straight up to hit the batter in the face.  After being thrown from the mound.  With any speed at all.

No, he was not deep. and that's exactly what it did. It hit the front edge of the plate and popped straight up and a bit to the right and bloodied the batter's face. It was a high school pitch, maybe high 70s MPH.

[beerguy55]

 

On 7/20/2019 at 6:20 PM, catsbackr said:

I guess he was kind of deep in the batter's box, huh?  

 

I mean for the ball to hit the plate and bounce straight up to hit the batter in the face.  After being thrown from the mound.  With any speed at all.

No, this could happen in any rec ball field where the home team is laying the bases for game time - meaning home plate isn't buried.  You know...the black part of the plate is actually visible.

Or any proper facility where the grounds are worn down and home plate isn't level with the dirt.