Batter Swaps Sides (Switch Hits) During Same AB

[UAME]

NFHS game, Visitor team is from 2.5 hours away.

RH Leadoff hitter, top of 1st inning.  Following wild pitch to push count to 3-0, batter takes position in the LH batter's box (had been in RH box for first three pitches.)

I said, "What are you doing?"

Batter, "Swapping sides."

Me, "Not in this at bat, you aren't."

Batter steps back to RH box, HC comes down to see me from 3rd base box.  HC says, "He can do that."

Me, "No, he can't."

HC, "You're WRONG.  I've clarified this with our local association and even contacted the NFHS.  You're taking away part of our strategy."

Coach's conviction has me doubting myself, so I said, "Coach, I hear you.  I hope that doesn't turn out to be the case, but we're not going to play that way today."

Coach offers to go to his bus and bring a rule book to the field.  I still felt fairly certain that this topic wasn't specifically covered in the rulebook (it MIGHT be a case play or an interpretation that had been issued.)  "Coach, we are ABSOLUTELY NOT doing that!"

HC, "I want your name & number, I'm calling you tonight."

"Coach, if I'm wrong, I want to know it, but we'll cover that after the game.  I can see this scenario playing out several ways, one of which is you returning home and telling your coaching buddies 'GUYS, YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO BELIEVE WHAT I TALKED THAT UMPIRE UP THERE INTO BELIEVING!' So, until I can research this myself, the batters are going to stay on the side they start the AB, unless there's a pitching change."

HC conceded to my authority, but obviously was confident he was correct. (He clearly had fought this battle before and scripted this scenario for his leadoff man.)

So, it appears he WAS correct and I was wrong?  As long his the batter swaps sides before the pitcher is on the rubber, he can go back and forth as much as he wants??

The coach and I exchanged texts the next day, where I apologized.  His team won easily, so it really wasn't an issue that impacted the game.  He said that he coaches his batters to call Time before making the swap.  (I honestly don't recall if the leadoff man requested Time or not, because I likely would have ignored it, being a wild pitch with no runners on base there was no valid reason in my mind to kill the live ball.)

I can't even find remote references to this in any rule book, case book, Childress's BRD, etc.

I can't fathom that this practice would be so common/accepted that it doesn't even get mentioned!  I cannot recall ever having seen it, at any level.  With all the ways that batters try to distract pitchers (faking bunts on 3-0, etc.) I'm shocked that it isn't more widely used if it is completely legal.

[noumpere]

3 minutes ago, UAME said:

So, it appears he WAS correct and I was wrong?  As long his the batter swaps sides before the pitcher is on the rubber, he can go back and forth as much as he wants??

 

The good news is that you learned something and will not make that mistake again.  Did you discuss it with your partner(s)?

[jimurrayalterego]

29 minutes ago, UAME said:

 

So, it appears he WAS correct and I was wrong?  As long his the batter swaps sides before the pitcher is on the rubber, he can go back and forth as much as he wants??

 

It appears that you are not sure. You were wrong.

[UAME]

45 minutes ago, noumpere said:

The good news is that you learned something and will not make that mistake again.  Did you discuss it with your partner(s)?

The HC didn't push the issue (in the top of the 1st) and we moved on before I offered to check with my partner.  Between innings my partner and I got together (he said he didn't think it was legal, either.)

19 minutes ago, jimurrayalterego said:

It appears that you are not sure. You were wrong.

Well, let me clarify... I TOLD the coach I was wrong that same night.  I exhausted every resource I had and convinced myself that it wasn't prohibited by the rules.

I guess my only lingering question is:  why don't you see this done more often?  I can't believe with all the baseball I've watched in my 50+ years, I haven't seen it before.

[Velho]

1 hour ago, UAME said:

I guess my only lingering question is:  why don't you see this done more often?  I can't believe with all the baseball I've watched in my 50+ years, I haven't seen it before.

I'd assume because they don't want to get plunked.

To add: [said in humor] watch more LL. They pull crazy stuff like this all the time 🤣

 

[BLWizzRanger]

1 hour ago, UAME said:

The HC didn't push the issue (in the top of the 1st) and we moved on before I offered to check with my partner.  Between innings my partner and I got together (he said he didn't think it was legal, either.)

Well, let me clarify... I TOLD the coach I was wrong that same night.  I exhausted every resource I had and convinced myself that it wasn't prohibited by the rules.

I guess my only lingering question is:  why don't you see this done more often?  I can't believe with all the baseball I've watched in my 50+ years, I haven't seen it before.

Because it's bush league and the coach's have integrity? I'm not saying this, of course, but some might think this way.... lol

[BigBlue4u]

1 hour ago, BLWizzRanger said:

The HC didn't push the issue (in the top of the 1st) and we moved on before I offered to check with my partner.  Between innings my partner and I got together (he said he didn't think it was legal, either.)

My question is:  Where did you get your information that switching places in the batter's box was not legal?  And, why did it take 17 paragraphs to describe the situation?

 

[UAME]

Well, before the game, here's what I knew:

1) There was a rule (7-3-3) that prohibits the batter from swapping boxes to rattle the pitcher.

2) There was a rule (6-1-1) that requires an ambidextrous pitcher to commit to one hand or the other before the batter makes his choice.

3) Since I didn't recall ever seeing a batter switch boxes during an AB, I presumed that once the choices were made under 6-1-1, both sides were "locked in" until the AB was complete or a pitching change occurred.

It didn't seem like much of a stretch to me.  But, I won't rule that way again.

 

 

[The Man in Blue]

A LONG time ago, when I was a player, this was how we learned to switch hit or bunt from the left side.  It wasn't about "rattling a pitcher" so much as the coach would let us experiment early in the count, but then we had to go back when it was time to "get serious."

I do like that your rationale has you looking at rules and using them to come to a justified (but wrong) conclusion.  You got to the wrong place, but that is thinking like an umpire.  I would have had to have sought you out and smacked you if you had said your partner, Ol' Smitty, had told you "We didn't let them do that in 1948, we ain't lettin' 'em do it today."

[BigBlue4u]

21 hours ago, UAME said:

) There was a rule (7-3-3) that prohibits the batter from swapping boxes to rattle the pitcher.

That is correct.  However, 7-3-3 does not prohibit the batter from stepping from the box on one side of home plate to the box on the other side.  It prohibits the batter from doing so in an effort to disconcert the pitcher.

[Velho]

20 minutes ago, BigBlue4u said:

However, 7-3-3 does not prohibit the batter from stepping from the box on one side of home plate to the box on the other side.  It prohibits the batter from doing so in an effort to disconcert the pitcher.

IF the pitcher is ready to pitch. Between pitches they can disconcert away.

 

SECTION 3 BATTING INFRACTIONS -A BATTER SHALL NOT: ART. 3 Disconcert the pitcher by stepping from the box on one side of home plate to the box on the other side while the pitcher is in position ready to pitch.

[The Man in Blue]

Do not forget there are other rules that come into play if the pitcher is ready and the batter steps out of the box, regardless of reason. 

[SH0102]

On 3/16/2026 at 5:33 PM, UAME said:

It didn't seem like much of a stretch to me

Couple tips to remember:

1) a rule book can not list every possible thing one CAN do, that would be unending. It lists what you are prohibited from doing and what you are required to do.

2) Even though we’ve all done it, we get in more hot water making up rules than we do not knowing them. When kid did it, since you’ve never read a rule prohibiting it, your instinct might be “hmph I don’t think he can do that”.  But rather than make up a rule and prohibit it, make a mental note to look it up later. It only needs addressed in the moment if there is a dispute (other coach argues)

if that happens, that’s when you get with your partner (unfortunately he didn’t know either) but even with a dispute, if you don’t KNOW it’s illegal you can’t call it illegal. It’s not a safety issue, tell him you’re playing on and basically same convo happens.

but better to say I can’t rule it illegal when neither of us can cite rule saying it’s illegal, if we’re wrong I’ll own it . 

but rules specify what you must do and what you can’t do, don’t make those up.  
 

havesame approach with balks, just bc it looks weird it isn’t a balk, ask yourself what rulebook language did he violate and if you can’t answer that, don’t call it. If coach argues ask them “what did you see that was illegal?” Prob gonna say something about being clunky or off balance or looks weird, none of which are in rule book.

[MadMax]

On 3/16/2026 at 12:39 PM, BLWizzRanger said:

Because it's bush league

Not “bush league” at all. It’s a veritable tactic, and with how… “vigorously” (?) some clubs / programs alert and adjust themselves when faced with a LHB to defend it, it’s worth utilizing. Didn’t Tsun Szu say something about inducing panic in your enemy, and let them defeat themselves? 

Say you’re a HS team, behind by a run, and you’ve got R1. Instead of bunting, why not try this? Send your next batter up to get in the LHB box. This shields the R1 from F2’s sight, reducing backpicks, and gives R1 a “screened” jump against F2’s throw. Then, once your Runner is standing on 2B, switch your Batter back to RHB box. If your Batter is well coached or disciplined, he’ll reduce his chances of BI when R2 steals 3B. Once standing on 3B (now R3), you can have the Batter stay RHB, and potentially set up a steal of Home, or a safety squeeze. Or, switch the Batter back to LHB and increase your chances that a ball put in play to the right side of the infield will score R3. 

See the game within the game? 

All legal. Not shenanigans. 

Please understand @UAME, I’m hot heaping on ya, but do you now see how much we dig our heels in when we don’t know the rules comprehensively? That, when confronted with the very situation that we only have a marginal, tenuous knowledge or understanding of, how defensive and inflexible we get? We (the umpire community) do a 💩 job of demonstrating and explaining the Rules for the… not “a”, the variety of learning types in the landscape of umpires that will be upholding those Rules. How ‘bout a diagram? How ‘bout a web article, with photos/illustrations? How ‘bout a video? 
No no! We’re far more perseverating on determining that eye-black is gang intimidation (how ‘bout some photos or illustrations?), and cramming that in the latest one printing per year paper tome of the year! 

At least NCAA has a digital version, emailed updates & notices, and the videos ta boot. That should be, in this day and age, a minimum standard. 

[The Man in Blue]

48 minutes ago, MadMax said:

We’re far more perseverating on determining that eye-black is gang intimidation (how ‘bout some photos or illustrations?), and cramming that in the latest one printing per year paper tome of the year! 

At least NCAA has a digital version, emailed updates & notices, and the videos ta boot. That should be, in this day and age, a minimum standard. 

And if you have a state like mine, they care so much and are so diligent with the game that they only send you that once-per-year printed publication every other year.  But we'll gladly send it to you in your off year for another $10.  And $10 more for a case book. 

And $23 more for the manual to explain mechanics that you are expected to need.

At least NCAA has a FREE digital version, emailed updates & notices, and the videos ta boot. That should be, in this day and age, a minimum standard.

[orangebird]

54 minutes ago, The Man in Blue said:

And if you have a state like mine, they care so much and are so diligent with the game that they only send you that once-per-year printed publication every other year.  But we'll gladly send it to you in your off year for another $10.  And $10 more for a case book. 

And $23 more for the manual to explain mechanics that you are expected to need.

At least NCAA has a FREE digital version, emailed updates & notices, and the videos ta boot. That should be, in this day and age, a minimum standard.

You can save 23 dollars by having your org use CCA at least lol

[UAME]

I don't feel piled on.  I understand and appreciate the critique offered here.  That's why I posted!

I have subsequently discovered that this HC is a good friend (former college teammate) of an umpire in our association.  To @MadMax's point, this umpire says this coach specifically moves a RH batter into the LH batter's box to shield F2's view for delayed steals.  I think, in my case, the team was doing this as a test with the leadoff hitter - I believe other umpires (like me) have incorrectly tried to prohibit the practice and he wanted to see how (or IF) I was going to rule on the practice.  I failed, obviously.  ☹️

I will say this:  I don't know of a FASTER way to learn the rules than being on the field, realizing you don't completely KNOW a rule, and discover immediately afterwards that you flubbed it!!  It's far from being ideal or preferred, but nothing burns it in your memory more than the absolute embarrassment of mishandling it.

[Velho]

1 hour ago, UAME said:

I will say this:  I don't know of a FASTER way to learn the rules than being on the field, realizing you don't completely KNOW a rule, and discover immediately afterwards that you flubbed it!!  It's far from being ideal or preferred, but nothing burns it in your memory more than the absolute embarrassment of mishandling it.

And that's why clinics need to be drills and situational plays. Nothing sears the neural pathways like screwing it up and being graciously led through the correction.

[MadMax]

4 hours ago, orangebird said:

You can save 23 dollars by having your org use CCA at least lol

That’s a disservice to the game – at that contextual level, if I can be frank. 

I’m all for the cost savings, certainly, but the CCA, in and of itself, is not the be-all-end-all compendium of umpiring. It’s just a book 📕, and like any other book, falls short because it cannot convey the tactile, temporal components of umpiring. And, because it’s predominately by-and-for college officiating, there are aspects to the High School game that should be addressed. 
I am not saying that the CCA Manual should cover it. Instead, what should happen is a whoooooole buncha assigners and “association heads” have to get off their collective acronyms and start physically training guys. No more relying on zoom meetings, no more hiding in classrooms and VFW / Community Center conference rooms. Those are only a part of the much more crucial process. If you’re pulling dues off guys and calling yourself an assigner, then you are obligated to train your staff. 

[Jonump]

The Fed Case book has an example of the batter legally switching during an at-bat: (6.1.1 F under pitching) and concludes an ambidexterous pitcher cannot switch in response. He/she has to wait for the next batter. But the switch by the batter is legal.

I vaguely remember another reference but I can't find the cite right now. I mean, if you are going to get one wrong you picked a fairly rare one

[UAME]

3 hours ago, Jonump said:

The Fed Case book has an example of the batter legally switching during an at-bat: (6.1.1 F under pitching) and concludes an ambidexterous pitcher cannot switch in response. He/she has to wait for the next batter. But the switch by the batter is legal.

I vaguely remember another reference but I can't find the cite right now. I mean, if you are going to get one wrong you picked a fairly rare one

Well, I was familiar with both rule 6-1-1 and this case play.  I did NOT have an ambidextrous F1 and the case play really isn't in the MIDDLE of an at-bat, and although it isn't stated as such, my knowledge of this exact case play led to my incorrect assumption:

I thought that the rules wanted to prohibit any repetitive-swapping scenario, but to do so required the committee to codify WHICH player (the pitcher or batter) would be mandated to choose first.  The rulesmakers chose the Pitcher must decide first and then stick with it.  After that, the batter gets to choose.  (The part I inferred, which was incorrect, was: and the batter must stick with his choice until the end of AB, inning, or a substitution is made.)

[The Man in Blue]

On 3/18/2026 at 9:40 AM, orangebird said:

You can save 23 dollars by having your org use CCA at least lol

I'll make sure to tell them to do that.  

 

[BLWizzRanger]

Coach:  Why did you call him out for stepping to the other box?

Ump: Well, he disconcerted the pitcher.

 

Why should we care what the player's feelings are when making a ruling? Even though NFHS gets to the point, IMHO, the NCAA rule is better written:
"The individual steps from one batter's box to the other wile the pitcher is in position ready to pitch."

I take this as the pitcher is in the set position and not the stretch.  Also, in the windup position, with both hands together and in front of the pitcher.

[The Man in Blue]

3 hours ago, BLWizzRanger said:

Coach:  Why did you call him out for stepping to the other box?

Ump: Well, he disconcerted the pitcher.

 

Why should we care what the player's feelings are when making a ruling? Even though NFHS gets to the point, IMHO, the NCAA rule is better written:
"The individual steps from one batter's box to the other wile the pitcher is in position ready to pitch."

I take this as the pitcher is in the set position and not the stretch.  Also, in the windup position, with both hands together and in front of the pitcher.

 

Blue, his girlfriend dumped him and he bombed his history test today. He was already disconcerted. 

 

IMO, this is about safety, not the pitcher's emotional well-being.  The language is probably left over from that bygone era when it was a gentlemen's game.  Totally agree that all language about reasons needs to go.

[The Man in Blue]

Since I am on spring break, I am sitting at a restaurant and completing my "promotion exam" . . . 

Here was question #3: