HBP Warning?

I didn't see any intent to hit the next two. They both looked like bad pitches. Just because they have been warned doen't mean you can't use the inside edge any more. It just means you can't go hitting guys on purpose. That's the part of the game where we have to umpire.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael S. Taylor:
I didn't see any intent to hit the next two. They both looked like bad pitches.

I agree.

Carl Childress talks about judging intent using two factors: Actions and Situation. In the case of the 2nd Pittsburgh batter being beaned, I don't think St Louis would want to put another man on when they're already down by 6 in the bottom of the 7th.

My point is if "intent" is a requirement for ejection, then why even have to have a warning in the first place? If you intentionally throw at a guy, why not automatic ejection? If not intentional, then nothing.

There doesn't have to be a warning, but it is a provision in the rules if the umpire chooses to use it. He can eject a pitcher immediately without a warning if he think it is justified.

In this case, it seems that he thinks a warning was the best method of managing the game. Sometimes a straight ejection is the better way to go, sometimes it isn't.

Umpires do the same with all sorts of behavior such as coaches arguing balls and strikes, judment calls, etc. It is all part of managing the game and a skill that can take years to perfect.

If he can shut it down with a warning that is good. He did it in a sitch why it may have been but it wasn't definite. If he has another sitch that causes an ejection the pitcher and manager both go automaticly.