Batter swings hits fair ball with hands umpire calls strike

[Side Retired]

Cal Ripken U11 tournament game. 1 out runners on first and third, 2-2 count. Batter swings at a pitch way inside, hits ball in play. Run scores, then runner from first goes to third. Plate ump calls time talks to partner. They rule the ball hit batter's hands. The plate umpire ruled there was no bat-ball contact. Calls strike 3, batter out, runners return to bases. Manager says it hit both hands and bat, it should be ball in play. Manager wants to know how ump can tell it only hit his batters hands. Umpire says the kid is in obvious pain and there was no sound of ball off bat.

I don't know how to tell the difference between a hit off the bat or a hit off hands, but isn't that an appeal play anyway? Isn't the fielding teams manager supposed to ask before the umpire rules on something like that? And was that the right call to start?

[noumpere]

Assuming the ball hit the hands first, it's a strike and a dead ball.  No appeal needed (or allowed).

[Tog Gee]

I had to umpire a playoff game (as a coach, behind the mound) a few years ago because the umpire called in sick. I am not fond of coaches calling their own games.

Each coach called the game when their team was on defense.

 

Second batter for the opposing team shows bunt and goes for a ball high and inside. Ball hits his fingers (and perhaps then the bat) and comes to rest in fair territory. Batter falls to the ground in pain.

I knew the pitch hitting the batter was a dead ball so I instinctively put my hands up and called time. Others were screaming for the kid to run/be tagged because it appeared to be a fair bunt.

Kid was fine after a minute, and I had to explain to the opposing team that it was simply a strike. I couldn't believe that a play like that happened in the first couple batters and I somehow got it right. But it wasn't strike three. I think opposing coach was cool with the strike call because the alternative was the batter runner being easily tagged or thrown out at first if it was ruled a live ball.

[beerguy55]

There's a lot to unpack here.

7 hours ago, Side Retired said:

Manager wants to know how ump can tell it only hit his batters hands.

Simply put - it's the umpire's job to use his judgment to determine this very thing.  Whether it hit the hands only...or the bat only...or the hands then the bat...or the bat then the hands.   And if you want to argue that it hit both at the exact same time, then you can enter the "tie goes to the runner" debate.  Without measuring in picoseconds and picometers, the ball hit the hands or the bat first.  

The ump uses his eyes and ears, and other common-sense considerations, to make the best judgment call he can.  It is literally his job.

7 hours ago, Side Retired said:

Manager says it hit both hands and bat, it should be ball in play

Nope - even if it hit the bat first, then the hands, it's now a foul ball.  It wouldn't be strike three, but it's definitely not in play.  The ball is dead either way.  It's only in play if the ump were to judge that it hit ONLY the bat.

 

 

8 hours ago, Side Retired said:

Isn't the fielding teams manager supposed to ask before the umpire rules on something like that?

 

Why would you think that?  If the umpire thinks he missed something he's free to talk to his partner to see if there's more information to get the call right. 

This isn't a check swing, if that's what you're thinking of.   Even if you were to believe (you, the observer, not the umpire) that the batter checked his swing, and it hit his hands, the plate umpire still has first judgment.  If he saw a swing, it's a swing.  No appeal necessary.  If the ball was in the strike zone when it was struck by the hands/bat, then it's a strike regardless...either foul, or dead ball strike three. 

The batter swung and the ball hit something.  It's the umpire's call to determine what it hit first.  And if he wants to get some help, he can.

8 hours ago, Side Retired said:

And was that the right call to start?

 

If you're asking about the rule - it's a dead ball strike three - batter out, and all runners return to their base at time of pitch.  The rule was correctly administered based on the umpire's judgment that it was a swing, and that the pitch hit the hands only/first.

If you're asking about judgment - don't. 

[The Man in Blue]

Sounds awfully high stakes . . . what did the video replay review show?

 

8 hours ago, Side Retired said:

Manager says it hit both hands and bat, it should be ball in play.

It doesn't matter if it hits both, hands AND bat.  It only matters what it hit first.  Coach is wrong.  (EDIT: good catch @beerguy55 . . . wouldn't be in play either way!)

 

8 hours ago, Side Retired said:

Manager wants to know how ump can tell it only hit his batters hands.

How can the manager tell it didn't?

 

8 hours ago, Side Retired said:

Plate ump calls time talks to partner. They rule the ball hit batter's hands. The plate umpire ruled there was no bat-ball contact. Calls strike 3, batter out, runners return to bases.

. . . 

Umpire says the kid is in obvious pain and there was no sound of ball off bat.

Sounds as if the umpire did a diligent job in trying to ensure they did the best job possible.  Sounds as if this is an umpire who knows what he is doing.

 

8 hours ago, Side Retired said:

Manager says it hit both hands and bat, it should be ball in play. Manager wants to know how ump can tell it only hit his batters hands. 

. . . 

I don't know how to tell the difference between a hit off the bat or a hit off hands, but isn't that an appeal play anyway? Isn't the fielding teams manager supposed to ask before the umpire rules on something like that? And was that the right call to start?

Why are you even bothering to pay umpires?  You got this . . . just make the calls you like and that benefit your team.  You could save so much money and time by eliminating these pesky "rules" and "umpires" who have experience, are trained, and study how to manage the game.

Sorry, I may be reverting to Grumpire mode . . . If you want an explanation of the process or the rule, ask that.  Parents and coaches need to stop with the "I don't like it, my kids was robbed, please validate me!" approach. 

[Velho]

58 minutes ago, The Man in Blue said:

Parents and coaches need to stop with the "I don't like it, my kids was robbed, please validate me!" approach. 

Heart and hopes overriding logic and fair play.

Something I keep reminding myself, especially as we head into LL postseason. 

[Side Retired]

I guess we're saying the umpires got it right, made the right call. That's fine. It's just a little confusing sometimes because sometimes you hear this team or that team has to make an appeal because the umpire isn't supposed to say anything in certain situations. Then something like this happens and the umpire goes out of his way to reverse things. How is the average person supposed to know when the umpire should make a call without asking or if one of the teams on the field has to make the appeal first? That's why this question even came up. Parents were talking about it in the bleachers.

[beerguy55]

6 minutes ago, Side Retired said:

I guess we're saying the umpires got it right, made the right call. That's fine. It's just a little confusing sometimes because sometimes you hear this team or that team has to make an appeal because the umpire isn't supposed to say anything in certain situations. Then something like this happens and the umpire goes out of his way to reverse things. How is the average person supposed to know when the umpire should make a call without asking or if one of the teams on the field has to make the appeal first? That's why this question even came up. Parents were talking about it in the bleachers.

Because the vast majority of bleacher-umpires don't take the time to actually know the rules of the game, or how umpires operate, but take even less time to espouse their opinions and expertise on said rules they haven't read.  A lot of the coaches aren't much better.

You've taken the first step many don't...asking actual umpires.  What I'd suggest is to ask future questions without the tone, derision, or accusation.  Or, even better, ask the question, regardless of whether or not it went your kid's way.

Then, ideally, pass the facts onto the ignoramuses sitting beside you - they'll likely tell you you're wrong...but you tried.  Nothing more powerful than the fear of being wrong...even in the face of incontrovertible evidence. 

Also remember - your players are amateurs, and so are the umpires.  

Umpires are a team, and, when they are at their best, they work to help each other, to get the call right, as best they can.  That might mean subtle signals to each other that one umpire may have some information for the other umpire.  Meaning the ump doesn't have to wait for a coach to ask to change his call.   It might be something as simple as seeing something, but letting the play go...and then conferring with the other umpire to make sure they have the rules right.

What you call an appeal is really just a request..."Blue, I'm pretty sure my player got under the tag...you may have had a bad angle...can you ask your partner for help?"   Said umpire can respond with something like "I had a good angle, I saw what I needed to see", and refuse the request, or "will do"...and then can see if the other ump has additional information for him to chew on...at which point said umpire can change his call...or not. 

On check-swing appeals, it is often customary for an umpire to wait, but there are scenarios where he could/would voluntarily look to the base ump.

For ACTUAL appeals (eg. missing a base, leaving early on a caught ball, batting out of order), then yes, the umpire is not to say anything (in most leagues) unless the coach formally appeals.   You are conflating very two different scenarios...which are covered in the rule book.

 

btw - I'm not an umpire, I'm a coach. (or was)   And I had a code of ethics for my parents... 1 - learn the rules or your opinion is not wanted.  2 - the coach will talk with the umpires, you cheer your kids on.   3 - I can't bench YOU.

[Richvee]

1 hour ago, Side Retired said:

I guess we're saying the umpires got it right, made the right call. That's fine. It's just a little confusing sometimes because sometimes you hear this team or that team has to make an appeal because the umpire isn't supposed to say anything in certain situations. Then something like this happens and the umpire goes out of his way to reverse things. How is the average person supposed to know when the umpire should make a call without asking or if one of the teams on the field has to make the appeal first? That's why this question even came up. Parents were talking about it in the bleachers.

When a coach approaches an umpire in a civilized way, you can get an answer. When he comes out hair on fire yelling “IT HIT THE BAT FIRST!! THAYS A LOVE BALL!! YOU GOTTA GET HELP!!”  Or any other comments similar, they’re not going to get an explanation. Approach an umpire with civility, “can I ask you a question? I think the ball hit the bat first… Wouldn’t that make it a love ball? “. The. You’ll get an answer why it’s not live, and an answer to “ a you get help on that”. 
come out screaming, especially when you have the rule wrong that you’re out there screaming about, and you’re gonna get nothing but an ejection. 
 

As for the parents and fans who think they know all the rules and know less than the coach….Just watch the game. Don’t pretend you know what you’re talking about. 
 

 

[The Man in Blue]

OK, @Richvee . . . I gotta' admit . . . LOVE BALL?  I have never heard that term.

 

[The Man in Blue]

6 hours ago, Side Retired said:

I guess we're saying the umpires got it right, made the right call. That's fine. It's just a little confusing sometimes because sometimes you hear this team or that team has to make an appeal because the umpire isn't supposed to say anything in certain situations. Then something like this happens and the umpire goes out of his way to reverse things. How is the average person supposed to know when the umpire should make a call without asking or if one of the teams on the field has to make the appeal first? That's why this question even came up. Parents were talking about it in the bleachers.

 

Well spoken, and I hope you forgive my snark.  I am a grumpy old man being provoked by the world.  😋

To help you understand (and I DO appreciate you asking and making the effort to learn), I want to take that highlighted portion first . . . if the umpire is not 100% certain -- and by 100% I mean 1000% -- what the ball hit first, letting the play play out is the best practice.  It is far easier to call it all back on a dead ball strike or foul ball call than it is to immediately kill it and then decide you were wrong. 

You can't un-ring a bell.  If you are a football fan, think about the defensive player who picks up a squirted out fumble and runs all the way to the endzone with the referee following.  Then they call it back and rule the runner down.  They let it go just in case.

How is the average person to know?  The average person won't.  The smarter-than-average person will ask an authority, and the much-smarter-than-average person will follow that up by finding a rulebook and confirming their answer.  (Yes, even umpires can be wrong.)

You can find OBR and NCAA rulebooks online for free as searchable .pdfs.  NFHS charges and uses a proprietary system, but you can buy a physical copy for $12 or so. 

 

[834k3r]

On 6/10/2025 at 7:43 AM, The Man in Blue said:

Sounds awfully high stakes . . . what did the video replay review show?

[Kevin_K]

On 6/10/2025 at 10:52 PM, The Man in Blue said:

OK, @Richvee . . . I gotta' admit . . . LOVE BALL?  I have never heard that term.

 

I think you may have just pwned @Richvee