Jump to content
jms1425

HBP sequence video on NCAA hub

Recommended Posts

http://ncaabaseball.arbitersports.com/front/105039/Video/player/34880/38215

SUMMARY: Count 2-1, no outs. Pitch comes in, B1 checks his swing, the ball hits something (B1's hand/the knob of the bat) and goes into fair territory where F2 picks it up and throws to 1st, but PU kills the action to award B1 1st on a HBP. Video review shows the ball hit the knob. The video concludes with the question, "What's the count?" but does not answer the question.

Anyone have an answer?

I only see 3 options, none of which is clearly correct to me: 

1) call B1 out at 1st; but I don't think you can because PU calling time deprived him of an opportunity to run to 1st (even though he would not have beaten the ball to there).

2) make it a "do-over", but is that fair to the defense who would have gotten an out had PU not killed the action?

3) award a strike, making the count 2-2? But on what grounds is this justified? This may be the fairest option, but how do we explain it to the coaches?

Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t work NCAA and can’t see the video, so this is purely me working through it with commoner’s logic ... and trying to think like an umpire.  I didn’t see anything in their rules to directly address corrections (looking at the “Getting calls right” section).

It is accepted that the umpire has the authority (and duty) to correct his error.  So let’s see what we do have:

The pitch was neither a strike nor a ball.

The batted ball was not a foul ball.

The umpire killed a live play.

Not seeing the video has me at a disadvantage here ... but if you felt the runner would have easily been out, I would say you can call him out.  I’m working through that using this from the “without video replay” section:

8) Changing a call of “foul” to “fair”
Note: Umpires may conference after a batted ball that first touches the ground or a fielder beyond the initial position of the first or third baseman and has been ruled "foul". After consultation with the entire umpire crew, the Crew Chief will place the base runners where the crew believes they would have advanced had the ball been first ruled fair. The Crew Chief and crew should be conservative on their placement of base runners.

 

Granted, this is using video replay, but the obligation/authority would be the same.  This is a similar ruling, IMO.

 

So my answer is a 0-0 count on the next batter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2-2 count. As for the reasoning... The pitcher delivered a legal pitch that was struck by the batter's bat. The erroneous killing of the play deprived both the defense and offense the ability to get an out/advance. So the only thing to do is to treat it as a foul ball, add a strike if applicable, return the batter to the box, and all runners (if any) to their previous bases.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

I don’t work NCAA and can’t see the video, so this is purely me working through it with commoner’s logic ... and trying to think like an umpire.  I didn’t see anything in their rules to directly address corrections (looking at the “Getting calls right” section).

It is accepted that the umpire has the authority (and duty) to correct his error.  So let’s see what we do have:

The pitch was neither a strike nor a ball.

The batted ball was not a foul ball.

The umpire killed a live play.

Not seeing the video has me at a disadvantage here ... but if you felt the runner would have easily been out, I would say you can call him out.  I’m working through that using this from the “without video replay” section:

8) Changing a call of “foul” to “fair”
Note: Umpires may conference after a batted ball that first touches the ground or a fielder beyond the initial position of the first or third baseman and has been ruled "foul". After consultation with the entire umpire crew, the Crew Chief will place the base runners where the crew believes they would have advanced had the ball been first ruled fair. The Crew Chief and crew should be conservative on their placement of base runners.

 

Granted, this is using video replay, but the obligation/authority would be the same.  This is a similar ruling, IMO.

 

So my answer is a 0-0 count on the next batter.

It's possible replay judged it hit the knob and then touched the batter's hand while he was in the box. Foul ball, 2-2 count

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, JSam21 said:

2-2 count. As for the reasoning... The pitcher delivered a legal pitch that was struck by the batter's bat. The erroneous killing of the play deprived both the defense and offense the ability to get an out/advance. So the only thing to do is to treat it as a foul ball, add a strike if applicable, return the batter to the box, and all runners (if any) to their previous bases.

Interesting interp.  As I said, I have no standing in NCAA so do NOT use my opinion to answer your test question ... but something is rotten in Denmark there.  Umpires have the authority to "make things right" in the case of their error, e.g., placing runners where they would have ended up.  To me, "making that play right" would be: the batter is out (it was very obvious and evident that would be the result, even if the batter had run).  There were no runners on base, so that keeps that part easy.

Calling it a foul ball, something it never was, seems more like trying to cover your backside with "it's close".  You have now deprived the defense of an obvious out and penalized the batter with a strike ... doesn't seem "right" to me as neither of those things were going to occur.  You either had a HBP, in which case the batter is on first OR you had a fair ball and a runner that was going to be out.  A foul ball was not an option.  

Nonetheless, it is NCAA's test.  :cheers:

 

1 hour ago, Jimurray said:

It's possible replay judged it hit the knob and then touched the batter's hand while he was in the box. Foul ball, 2-2 count

It's possible, but not a piece of information we were given.  It's also not allowable for a replay to overturn a call on "it's possible".  The NCAA rule book states it must be indisputable.  Perhaps somebody else saw that ball indisputably hit the batter's hand ... I didn't.

 

Thank you @johnnyg08 for posting the video!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, The Man in Blue said:

Interesting interp.  As I said, I have no standing in NCAA so do NOT use my opinion to answer your test question ... but something is rotten in Denmark there.  Umpires have the authority to "make things right" in the case of their error, e.g., placing runners where they would have ended up.  To me, "making that play right" would be: the batter is out (it was very obvious and evident that would be the result, even if the batter had run).  There were no runners on base, so that keeps that part easy.

Calling it a foul ball, something it never was, seems more like trying to cover your backside with "it's close".  You have now deprived the defense of an obvious out and penalized the batter with a strike ... doesn't seem "right" to me as neither of those things were going to occur.  You either had a HBP, in which case the batter is on first OR you had a fair ball and a runner that was going to be out.  A foul ball was not an option.  

Nonetheless, it is NCAA's test.  :cheers:

 

It's possible, but not a piece of information we were given.  It's also not allowable for a replay to overturn a call on "it's possible".  The NCAA rule book states it must be indisputable.  Perhaps somebody else saw that ball indisputably hit the batter's hand ... I didn't.

 

Thank you @johnnyg08 for posting the video!

 

 

I think the line of thought is... We know we have a legal pitch. We know we have a ball striking the bat. Then the ball is immediately called dead. After that all we have is assumptions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

8) Changing a call of “foul” to “fair”
Note: Umpires may conference after a batted ball that first touches the ground or a fielder beyond the initial position of the first or third baseman and has been ruled "foul". After consultation with the entire umpire crew, the Crew Chief will place the base runners where the crew believes they would have advanced had the ball been first ruled fair. The Crew Chief and crew should be conservative on their placement of base runners.

 

Granted, this is using video replay, but the obligation/authority would be the same.  This is a similar ruling, IMO.

This applies only to balls in the outfield.

Let's draw a less controversial example that bridges this a bit. Take the same play, but the ball goes down close to the batter's foot and rolls fair. PU calls it foul for striking the foot, but it is not correct. We cannot change that to a fair ball. It's foul, even in error.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

Interesting interp.  As I said, I have no standing in NCAA so do NOT use my opinion to answer your test question ... but something is rotten in Denmark there.  Umpires have the authority to "make things right" in the case of their error, e.g., placing runners where they would have ended up.  To me, "making that play right" would be: the batter is out (it was very obvious and evident that would be the result, even if the batter had run).  There were no runners on base, so that keeps that part easy.

Calling it a foul ball, something it never was, seems more like trying to cover your backside with "it's close".  You have now deprived the defense of an obvious out and penalized the batter with a strike ... doesn't seem "right" to me as neither of those things were going to occur.  You either had a HBP, in which case the batter is on first OR you had a fair ball and a runner that was going to be out.  A foul ball was not an option.  

Nonetheless, it is NCAA's test.  :cheers:

 

It's possible, but not a piece of information we were given.  It's also not allowable for a replay to overturn a call on "it's possible".  The NCAA rule book states it must be indisputable.  Perhaps somebody else saw that ball indisputably hit the batter's hand ... I didn't.

 

Thank you @johnnyg08 for posting the video!

 

 

The possible refers to me postulating. Replay would either have it hit the hand or not. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Matt said:

This applies only to balls in the outfield.

Let's draw a less controversial example that bridges this a bit. Take the same play, but the ball goes down close to the batter's foot and rolls fair. PU calls it foul for striking the foot, but it is not correct. We cannot change that to a fair ball. It's foul, even in error.

That is why I didn't cite that directly (I started to, then backed it out), but rather used it as an example.  I'm not referring to a rule specifically, but rather "thinking like an umpire".  Although, I would say that lends itself to NOT being able to rule the ball foul, as fair/foul is not reviewable unless it is past the infielders (not necessarily the outfield, but I know what you meant) if I am understanding that correctly.  You could only rule on "did it hit him or the bat" and remedy that answer.

If we want a direct citation though, look at (h) under the last section.  "If the reversing of a call results in the need for decisions on the placement of base runners, the crew chief shall use is best judgment to determine their locations as if the call had been made correctly (with exception to placement prescribed by rule on catch/no catch reversals)."  Then again, the line "Also, some calls cannot be reversed without creating larger problems." is written up above that ( (f) of the "without video" section).  So true!  :P  I suppose the answer lies in "best judgment" of that crew and there is not a definitive answer.  :meditation:

I agree with your example.  However, we aren't looking at a fair ball in this case, so ending up at a foul ball seems to be nothing more than a bail out for the umpire. 

Lacking any experience with replay, what happens in your situation @Matt?  I'm assuming the correct ruling is that it is not a reviewable play based on what we said above about fair/foul balls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

That is why I didn't cite that directly (I started to, then backed it out), but rather used it as an example.  I'm not referring to a rule specifically, but rather "thinking like an umpire".  Although, I would say that lends itself to NOT being able to rule the ball foul, as fair/foul is not reviewable unless it is past the infielders (not necessarily the outfield, but I know what you meant) if I am understanding that correctly.  You could only rule on "did it hit him or the bat" and remedy that answer.

If we want a direct citation though, look at (h) under the last section.  "If the reversing of a call results in the need for decisions on the placement of base runners, the crew chief shall use is best judgment to determine their locations as if the call had been made correctly (with exception to placement prescribed by rule on catch/no catch reversals)."  Then again, the line "Also, some calls cannot be reversed without creating larger problems." is written up above that ( (f) of the "without video" section).  So true!  :P  I suppose the answer lies in "best judgment" of that crew and there is not a definitive answer.  :meditation:

I agree with your example.  However, we aren't looking at a fair ball in this case, so ending up at a foul ball seems to be nothing more than a bail out for the umpire. 

Lacking any experience with replay, what happens in your situation @Matt?  I'm assuming the correct ruling is that it is not a reviewable play based on what we said above about fair/foul balls.

The HBP issue is reviewable if the offense challenges it or it is in the last two innings. The rest of the play, no.

I'm really not sure what I would do to make things right in this. There is no correct answer (that is, any that are consistent with the rules;) only solutions that are at least partially incorrect by rule. Strangely, the fix that would be most likely to match what would have happened (ruling the runner out) is the most incorrect as the defense never legally put him out (and NCAA regulations do not allow outs to be called as a result of a prior portion of the play being reversed.) At least calling it foul or awarding him first could be hidden behind an explanation of judgement (which, to me being overly literal, would be incorrect by rule because it's not truly what the umpire has judged.)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The game shown in the video was played June 1, 2019, in Corvallis, Oregon. According to the play-by-play account of the game that can be found on the NCAA website the disputed call was called a foul ball—the batter was number 10 and his name is Eric Santiago. Here’s the record of his at-bat from that play-by-play--

Santiago struck out swinging (2-2 BBKFFS).

And here is a similar play from the 2016 BRD (section 541, p. 353):

Play 335-541:  Without dropping his bat Bubba hunkers down to avoid an inside pitch. The ball nicks off the knob end and rolls into fair territory. The UIC erroneously calls “Foul ball!” and then quickly yells “Play it! Fair ball!” On the first call Bubba stops and starts to return; on the second call, F2 picks up the ball and throws to first for the out. Ruling:  It’s a foul ball at all levels.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Matt — the catcher did complete the play and throw to first base.  It was after the umpire killed it, but the defense did complete the play.  With that, it is very easy to see what would have happened.  Because I don’t know, what rule or citation from NCAA says an out cannot be called in that situation?  What sense does it make to say you can only reward (or make whole) the offense by placing runners, but not the defense by awarding outs?
 

@Senor Azul — Not sure the play by play says that play was ruled a foul ball ... just that he struck out on a 2-2 count.  I can’t find any more detail or video.  Maybe?  The BRD case play you provide doesn’t work here.  In that case, the umpire goofed and called it foul.  I fully agree that ball stays foul.  In this case, it was never called foul, so how can you end up foul?  If you use that BRD ruling and this case, the precedent set with this ruling is any complex umpire error at the plate should just be called a foul ball.  :WTF  :big_no

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

@Matt — the catcher did complete the play and throw to first base.  It was after the umpire killed it, but the defense did complete the play.  With that, it is very easy to see what would have happened.  Because I don’t know, what rule or citation from NCAA says an out cannot be called in that situation?  What sense does it make to say you can only reward (or make whole) the offense by placing runners, but not the defense by awarding outs?
 

@Senor Azul — Not sure the play by play says that play was ruled a foul ball ... just that he struck out on a 2-2 count.  I can’t find any more detail or video.  Maybe?  The BRD case play you provide doesn’t work here.  In that case, the umpire goofed and called it foul.  I fully agree that ball stays foul.  In this case, it was never called foul, so how can you end up foul?  If you use that BRD ruling and this case, the precedent set with this ruling is any complex umpire error at the plate should just be called a foul ball.  :WTF  :big_no

Yes this is a head scratcher as the narrator says the video review said the ball only hit the bat. I wonder if that's what was determined. The PU had a HBP so he saw or heard something that engendered that call. The video shows the ball deflected down off the knob which contact could also include the batter's finger. Unless there are other angles I can't see how you could preclude any hand contact also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

@Matt — the catcher did complete the play and throw to first base.  It was after the umpire killed it, but the defense did complete the play.  With that, it is very easy to see what would have happened.  Because I don’t know, what rule or citation from NCAA says an out cannot be called in that situation?  What sense does it make to say you can only reward (or make whole) the offense by placing runners, but not the defense by awarding outs?
 

@Senor Azul — Not sure the play by play says that play was ruled a foul ball ... just that he struck out on a 2-2 count.  I can’t find any more detail or video.  Maybe?  The BRD case play you provide doesn’t work here.  In that case, the umpire goofed and called it foul.  I fully agree that ball stays foul.  In this case, it was never called foul, so how can you end up foul?  If you use that BRD ruling and this case, the precedent set with this ruling is any complex umpire error at the plate should just be called a foul ball.  :WTF  :big_no

I wouldn't say that it would be ANY complex umpire error. It appears that it would be when the umpire kills the play in error before anything else has been done besides a pitch being thrown and it hitting the bat, you would treat it as a foul ball. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the cleanest way to handle this (after the fact) in the new world of replay is to call it a foul ball. 

No different than any other batted ball hitting the batter in the batter's box. 

Ideally, the umpire could have taken just a hair longer to watch the batter's reaction to maybe give him a hint of what happened before killing the play. 

Or...let the whole thing play out and revert to a foul ball on replay...for those who have the benefit of replay. 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

I think the cleanest way to handle this (after the fact) in the new world of replay is to call it a foul ball. 

No different than any other batted ball hitting the batter in the batter's box. 

Ideally, the umpire could have taken just a hair longer to watch the batter's reaction to maybe give him a hint of what happened before killing the play. 

Or...let the whole thing play out and revert to a foul ball on replay...for those who have the benefit of replay. 

 

 

 

 

There is a hint of a slight wince. Not enough contact to react dramatically but enough contact to evoke a wince. I don't see how replay could say the ball only hit the bat.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JSam21 said:

I wouldn't say that it would be ANY complex umpire error. It appears that it would be when the umpire kills the play in error before anything else has been done besides a pitch being thrown and it hitting the bat, you would treat it as a foul ball. 

Ok, that was a bit broad on my part ... any complex error that kills a live ball.

3 hours ago, johnnyg08 said:

I think the cleanest way to handle this (after the fact) in the new world of replay is to call it a foul ball. 

No different than any other batted ball hitting the batter in the batter's box. 

Ideally, the umpire could have taken just a hair longer to watch the batter's reaction to maybe give him a hint of what happened before killing the play. 

Or...let the whole thing play out and revert to a foul ball on replay...for those who have the benefit of replay. 

It wasn’t a batted ball that hit the batter in the batter’s box.  It never was a foul ball, so it cannot revert to one.

I do not understand how or why we keep going to a foul ball, it was NEVER a foul ball and it was never called a foul ball.  The plate umpire killed it on a HBP.  Had he called it a foul ball, we have the answer.  He didn’t.

I fully agree with with you on the umpire calling it too quickly though.  There was no need to kill it/call it that fast, especially with no runners on base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/11/2020 at 12:33 PM, The Man in Blue said:

The pitch was neither a strike nor a ball.

it certainly was one or the other...once the pitch hits the bat or the batter is a strike or a ball.

 

3 hours ago, johnnyg08 said:

I think the cleanest way to handle this (after the fact) in the new world of replay is to call it a foul ball. 

No different than any other batted ball hitting the batter in the batter's box. 

Ideally, the umpire could have taken just a hair longer to watch the batter's reaction to maybe give him a hint of what happened before killing the play. 

Or...let the whole thing play out and revert to a foul ball on replay...for those who have the benefit of replay. 

 

I suspect over time you will see umpires instructed to let a play proceed, as they do in football, but as far as the cleanest way, I have no problem with making a judgment to what would have happened.

Though it's not NCAA I use the MLB Rangers/Blue Jays playoff play as precedent to how this type of review could/should be handled.. F2 (Russell.Martin) throws the ball back to the pitcher, it hits the batter (Shin-Soo Choo), and as the ball rolls towards F5 (Josh Donaldson), R3 (Odor) breaks for home, at the same time PU  (incorrectly) kills the play - Odor continues home, Donaldson lets up.   After review and discussion the umps (correctly IMO) determine Choo was in the box and there was no intent, so time should not have been called, and allow the run to score.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

it certainly was one or the other...once the pitch hits the bat or the batter is a strike or a ball.


:WTF  

 

Pitched ball hits batter = dead ball, either (1) HBP if the batter didn’t swing or (2) dead ball strike if he did swing

Pitched ball hits bat = either (1) fair ball or (2) foul ball

:cheers:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jimurray said:

There is a hint of a slight wince. Not enough contact to react dramatically but enough contact to evoke a wince. I don't see how replay could say the ball only hit the bat.


As for the replay I would not call that a wince more of a trying to pull the bat back.  IMHO  with regards to what I see with the batter he never pulled his hand from the bat nor showed that he had a finger get hit by the ball.  I have never seen a "HBP" in the hand player be so cool calm or collected.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, The Man in Blue said:

Ok, that was a bit broad on my part ... any complex error that kills a live ball.

It wasn’t a batted ball that hit the batter in the batter’s box.  It never was a foul ball, so it cannot revert to one.

I do not understand how or why we keep going to a foul ball, it was NEVER a foul ball and it was never called a foul ball.  The plate umpire killed it on a HBP.  Had he called it a foul ball, we have the answer.  He didn’t.

I fully agree with with you on the umpire calling it too quickly though.  There was no need to kill it/call it that fast, especially with no runners on base.

It might have been a batted ball off the knob that then hit the batter's hand every so slightly and by rule semantically correct, in the batter's box. But, off this specific topic,  I never thought to apply that literally if batted ball hit the knob and then, let's say the batter's wrist when he was holding the bat over the plate for a bunt and pulled it back. Would you call that a fair batted ball touching the batter in fair territory and call him out or do we call that a foul ball because it hit the batter, (who was?) in the box.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ArchAngel72 said:


As for the replay I would not call that a wince more of a trying to pull the bat back.  IMHO  with regards to what I see with the batter he never pulled his hand from the bat nor showed that he had a finger get hit by the ball.  I have never seen a "HBP" in the hand player be so cool calm or collected.

He could have been anticipating the pain which did not then from the slight touch of his finger. The ball deflects down from the knob so the potential of touching a finger is there. The ball did not squarely hit the knob. The PU had something that engendered a HBP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...