Can you have a foul ball without it being counted as a swing?

[ArchAngel72]

Pitcher throws the ball inside and the batter does not clear the knob of the bat. It hits the knob while the batter is trying to avoid being hit himself.  Ball is declared foul.

 

However my question is.  Is that considered a swing?

 

I have seen two rulings recently where the same umpire called it foul and then stated the batter swung the bat ( which I did not see a swing ) then the other situation the umpire asked U1  Did he go and U1 declared no swing.

 

Anyway just asking is a foul off the bat via a pitch that the batter is defending himself called a swing?

 

[beerguy55]

 

3 minutes ago, ArchAngel72 said:

However my question is.  Is that considered a swing?

It's an irrelevant question.

Doesn't matter if it's a swing or not.  It hit the bat, it's a foul ball.  It doesn't matter how or why...if it's a legal pitch that hits that bat, that's all that matters.   

 

There are countless cases, documented in MLB, of a pitch going over a batter's head and hitting their bat as they duck...foul ball.

[Velho]

23 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

There are countless cases, documented in MLB, of a pitch going over a batter's head and hitting their bat as they duck...foul ball.

... and a number of cases in LL for that ball being fair - and everyone standing around for a long time as PU blows out their elbow silently pointing fair over and over. 😂 

[ArchAngel72]

27 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

 

It's an irrelevant question.

Doesn't matter if it's a swing or not.  It hit the bat, it's a foul ball.  It doesn't matter how or why...if it's a legal pitch that hits that bat, that's all that matters.   

 

There are countless cases, documented in MLB, of a pitch going over a batter's head and hitting their bat as they duck...foul ball.

This is a very relevant question at this time because if its a swing it cannot be reviewed in MLB

[ArchAngel72]

 

 

This is the situation I am talking about.   regardless of Angel calling it a swing.     IS it a swing?  Take his call out of this   Just the situation of the ball being fouled off the knob  without the batter swinging the bat.  Is that considered a swing?

Take the other situation batter ducks and it hits the bat behind their head and goes foul.

Is that a swing?

[Velho]

30 minutes ago, ArchAngel72 said:

I have seen two rulings recently where the same umpire called it foul and then stated the batter swung the bat ( which I did not see a swing ) then the other situation the umpire asked U1  Did he go and U1 declared no swing.

 

Not sure these are the ones you're referring to but the Angel / Torkelsson one was HPU Angel declaring he swung (no one else's opinion matters of course).

The other was an inside pitch ruled as a hit initially and a 1-3 putout. HPU never asked U1 "did he go?" so replay was only allowed to decide HBP or not. Replay ruled HBP, BR awarded 1B (even though he blatantly offered at the pitch).

[Velho]

52 minutes ago, ArchAngel72 said:

Take the other situation batter ducks and it hits the bat behind their head and goes foul.

Is that a swing?

It's a ball put in play.

This is obviously sticking in your craw. Help us understand why. My (and @beerguy55 I think) reaction is that's a stats/scorekeeper question so we aren't concerned with it. Are you thinking something else as why it matters?

EDIT: Better understanding your earlier posts: Is it the MLB review ability aspect?

[MadMax]

45 minutes ago, ArchAngel72 said:

This is a very relevant question at this time because if its a swing it cannot be reviewed in MLB

This is excellent point, and why this is such a divisive topic. 

If we have the ball contacting the bat first, then we either will have a ball put into play, or Foul (hitting next the Batter, the F2, the PU 🫣😫🤬, or remaining in Foul Territory). Did he swing? Irrelevant / Inconsequential… it’s a batted ball. 

If, however, the pitched ball contacts the Batter first, that takes priority. The ball is Dead at that point. So, in all three codes, the next question that must be answered is – did the batter swing (strike at) that pitch? If he did, then it’s a Dead Ball Strike. If he did not swing, then we… go to a different question (based on code/level). 

However, that margin of interpretation is much, much finer, or thinner, in Pro-level OBR than any other level and code. In Pro-level OBR, they are able to review a pitch so as to determine whether the bat was contacted first, or the Batter. Of course, if it’s judged (not reviewable) that he swung, then the ramifications of the review are changed, especially with 2 strikes – therein, if the pitch contacted the bat first, then it’s just a (common) foul ball; if it contacted the Batter first, and he swung, then it’s a Dead Ball StrikeOut. 
Big difference. 

So yes, it is important as to whether or not the Batter swung. 

[ArchAngel72]

I am confused...

 

Did Madmax just verify I have a relevant concern... Is  what I stated indeed true?

 

I may feint...  

 

So is a foul off the end of a bat when a batter did not actually attempt to hit the ball considered a swing?

 

[MadMax]

12 minutes ago, ArchAngel72 said:

I may feint...  

Make sure you step off the rubber first. 

13 minutes ago, ArchAngel72 said:

So is a foul off the end of a bat when a batter did not actually attempt to hit the ball considered a swing?

I’d be inclined to say “no”. There is no prompt or inquiry (or appeal, if you will) as to “did he go (swing, make a swing attempt, et. al.)?” All participants could see and/or hear that the ball contacted the bat. 

I wasn’t aware that there are swing quotas / limits. 
 

 

 

… if there are, what’s the world 🌎 coming to? 

[Jimurray]

1 hour ago, ArchAngel72 said:

I am confused...

 

Did Madmax just verify I have a relevant concern... Is  what I stated indeed true?

 

I may feint...  

 

So is a foul off the end of a bat when a batter did not actually attempt to hit the ball considered a swing?

 

No Angel was confused. He had the ball hit the bat and go sharp and direct to the catcher. He signaled foul tip. The umps got together and somehow determined that angel had a swing and it couldn’t be reviewed. Angel then decided the ball hit the batter and it was a swing so a dead ball strike. 
You should not draw any rule conclusions from this goat rope. 

[beerguy55]

4 hours ago, ArchAngel72 said:

This is a very relevant question at this time because if its a swing it cannot be reviewed in MLB

I'm not clear on the correlation, or where you're getting that interpretation.

I can absolutely think of a case  (pretty sure it was Justin Smoak) where a batter swung at strike three on a curve ball, the ball went to the backstop and the batter safely reached first.  Then upon video review it was determined the ball hit the batter - batter out.

A foul ball is reviewable only if it lands beyond the umpires...doesn't matter if he swung or not.  If the ball hits the bat and then lands in the in front of the 1st/3rd umpire it's not reviewable.  If it somehow hits the knob of his bat (or the barrel over his head when he ducks) and lands 20 feet beyond the third base ump, it is reviewable - for fair/foul.  

A HBP is reviewable yes, to whether it hit the batter, the bat, or nothing at all.  If it hit the batter then hitting the bat is irrelevant (once it hits the batter the ball is dead)...and then it's simply up to the umpire's judgment to whether or not there was a swing - whether the ball hit the bat after the batter doesn't matter.

3 hours ago, MadMax said:

So yes, it is important as to whether or not the Batter swung.

Only if it hit the batter first, not if it hit the bat first...if it hit the bat first it doesn't matter at all if the batter swung.   If it hit the knob first it's a batted ball...if it hit the batter first it's immediately dead...if it hit the bat after hitting the batter, that should have no bearing on the judgment of a swing.

[beerguy55]

4 hours ago, ArchAngel72 said:

Take the other situation batter ducks and it hits the bat behind their head and goes foul.

Is that a swing?

It does not matter.  It's either fair or foul.   It's reviewable or not reviewable NOT based on a judgment of swing, but based solely on where the ball landed....for the purpose of fair/foul.

[MadMax]

3 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

if it hit the bat first it doesn't matter at all if the batter swung. 

Correct. 

3 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

if it hit the bat after hitting the batter, that should have no bearing on the judgment of a swing.

Correct, however, a swing (attempt) must be judged separate of whether or not the ball contacted the batter. 

One of the most gruesome examples of this was Giancarlo Stanton… 

When all was said and done, and Stanton was carted off, it was judged a swing. 

[834k3r]

19 hours ago, ArchAngel72 said:

I may feint...  

 

19 hours ago, MadMax said:

Make sure you step off the rubber first. 

💀

[Aging_Arbiter]

On 4/11/2024 at 2:29 PM, ArchAngel72 said:

This is the situation I am talking about.   regardless of Angel calling it a swing.     IS it a swing? 

No

 

On 4/11/2024 at 2:29 PM, ArchAngel72 said:

Take the other situation batter ducks and it hits the bat behind their head and goes foul.

Is that a swing?

No

[beerguy55]

On 4/11/2024 at 12:26 PM, ArchAngel72 said:

This is a very relevant question at this time because if its a swing it cannot be reviewed in MLB

I'm still trying to figure out the scope or purpose of this statement...can you provide any clarification?

You cannot review a swing, for the purposes of determining if it wasn't a swing; yes...that's true...if the PU sees and calls it swing, it is so...if PU goes to a BU for help and the BU rules it a swing, it is so.  And if neither rule it a swing, it is so.

But a swing does not prevent the ability to review a play for other purposes.  (otherwise you'd never be able to review a catch/no catch..."well, he swung, you can't review the play")

In the Angel video above, he judged a swing making the review (almost) moot for the offense - it's a strike either way.  But yes, a HBP is reviewable even if the batter swung.  

The bottom line is you don't need a swing to have a batted ball.  And if you have a batted ball, it doesn't matter if he swung or not...ever.

 

See this clip where Justin Smoak swings at strike three and runs to first base.

 

However, if you see the play-by-play here you'll see it was overturned on replay review....dead ball strike three.

 

Toronto Blue Jays vs Baltimore Orioles Box Score: May 20, 2017 | Baseball-Reference.com

And, oddly, a week later the review booth seems to have kicked a similar call where MLB had to reiterate that a HBP on a swing is indeed reviewable.

 

https://www.closecallsports.com/2017/05/mlb-admits-error-on-swinging-hbp-strike.html

 

 

 

[ArchAngel72]

20 hours ago, Aging_Arbiter said:

No

 

No

oK THANK YOU

 

So no swing is required to cause a foul ball, or a ball in play.

 

 

Sorry for all the confusion I was merely trying to help Angel out with the mind set that "Well he fouled it off so that is a swing"

 

Cause I am just struggling with the fact a batter does not have to, and it is not considered to have  swung if the pitcher strikes his bat with the ball.  I mean yeah he did not actually swing, but then its like how did the ball become determined as fair or foul after that what action caused it.. "None"  So being that its a non action why does the batter then get a strike counted against him?  He did not offer... he was just crap unlucky the pitcher had the talent to hit his bat.  Anyone else seeing this rabbit hole or am I the only one looking at this scratching my head.

 

I mean if a pitcher throws behind a guy and you warn him, could not he say well I was throwing at his bat?

 

 

[beerguy55]

2 hours ago, ArchAngel72 said:

Cause I am just struggling with the fact a batter does not have to, and it is not considered to have  swung if the pitcher strikes his bat with the ball.  I mean yeah he did not actually swing, but then its like how did the ball become determined as fair or foul after that what action caused it.. "None"  So being that its a non action why does the batter then get a strike counted against him?  He did not offer

Because that is the definition of a strike:

 

A STRIKE is a legal pitch when so called by the umpire, which: (a) Is struck at by the batter and is missed; (b) Is not struck at, if any part of the ball passes through any part of the strike zone; (c) Is fouled by the batter when he has less than two strikes; (d) Is bunted foul; (e)Touches the batter as he strikes at it; (f) Touches the batter in flight in the strike zone; or (g) Becomes a foul tip.

 

The "offer" part only matters on a pitch that was missed.  A pitch that hits the bat is a batted ball...under the same guise of "non action" or blind luck or whatever you want to call it, the batter could just as easily get an infield single out of it...even an RBI.

[Kevin_K]

3 hours ago, ArchAngel72 said:

So no swing is required to cause a foul ball, or a ball in play.

Think of all the times you may have heard players be advised to lower their bats when ducking out of the way when a pitch is up and in. Would it be a foul/fair ball if the pitch hit their bat?

[ArchAngel72]

Just now, Kevin_K said:

Think of all the times you may have heard players be advised to lower their bats when ducking out of the way when a pitch is up and in. Would it be a foul/fair ball if the pitch hit their bat?

 

I get it.  
I'm just trying to present a debate..

 

However this is like being on the flat earth side..

 

[Senor Azul]

Since no rule set was specified in the OP, here's a FED rule that actually uses the word "touch."

FED rule 7-2-3...A foul ball or a fair hit (which may be a bunt) occurs when a pitch is touched by the bat of the batter who is in the batter's box. (2-5-1, 2-16-1, 2-16-2)

[ArchAngel72]

SA you have done it again Sir  Thank You!

 

[Senor Azul]

Prior to 1920, OBR considered a pitch touching the bat accidentally to be a strike. Then in 1920 the rule was changed to it being a dead ball. They deleted that rule in 1921 and the rule has been called a fair or foul hit ever since.

[Aging_Arbiter]

On 4/16/2024 at 12:35 PM, ArchAngel72 said:

 

I get it.  
I'm just trying to present a debate..

 

However this is like being on the flat earth side..

 

So during the eclipse, when the flat earth flipped were you in the over easy, over medium or over hard zone of coverage?

[beerguy55]

1 hour ago, Aging_Arbiter said:

So during the eclipse, when the flat earth flipped were you in the over easy, over medium or over hard zone of coverage?

I managed to dance on the edge while it was sideways.