If the ball bounces first and then hits the batter is it same as hitbatsman or just a ball?
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Ball is dead and the batter takes first. It is still a pitch and the batter will still get first if hit by it.
quote:Originally posted by Mohawk4ever:
If the ball bounces first and then hits the batter is it same as hitbatsman or just a ball?
A pitch that takes dirt before reaching the plate can be anything but a called strike.
If you rang it up, it would be a called strike. Not a very good one, but a called strike nonetheless.
I'm sure the offensive coach would love to hear that explanation. 
quote:Originally posted by dash_riprock:
If you rang it up, it would be a called strike. Not a very good one, but a called strike nonetheless.
If you rang it up you would be greviously in error.
Dash:
Jimmy is right, if you ring a strike on a bounced pitch, you would be wrong. Now if it bounces and the batter tips it, the catcher can catch it for a caught third strike.
Jimmy is right, if you ring a strike on a bounced pitch, you would be wrong. Now if it bounces and the batter tips it, the catcher can catch it for a caught third strike.
I didn't say it would be right to ring up a pitch that bounced in front of the plate, I just said it would be a called strike.
quote:Originally posted by Michael S. Taylor:
Dash:Now if it bounces and the batter tips it, the catcher can catch it for a caught third strike.
No sir. That's a foul ball.
quote:Originally posted by dash_riprock:quote:Originally posted by Michael S. Taylor:
Dash:Now if it bounces and the batter tips it, the catcher can catch it for a caught third strike.
No sir. That's a foul ball.
Sorry. Wrong again.
J/R had ruled that a foul ball, and the JEA ruled it a foul tip. Using the logic that if it can struck for a hit, it can be struck for a foul tip, MLB has adopted the Evans ruling and Rick Roder has accepted it as well both in his role as the WUA rules spokesman and as editor of the J/R stating he will change his ruling in future editions.
On second thought, that's a good one Mike. If it's a foul tip, and it's the 3rd strike, is it a CAUGHT 3rd strike? If it were an ordinary bounced pitch, and the batter swung and missed, it would not be a caught pitch. Does tipping it with the bat make a difference? I have to think about this one.
Yes, that is the difference. There has been a huge debate whether tipping a bounced pitch can be a foul tip or a regular foul. I have always been on Evan's position. Roder has since changed his mind and everyone is now on the same page.
I'm also in Evans's camp. I think once it is tipped, the pitch ends and it becomes a batted ball (a foul tip is a batted ball).
I have never seen this happen and I doubt I ever will. Either the batter will hammer it into the ground, or the catcher's glove will be so low (anticipating catching the ball at ground level) that he won't come close to catching it if it's tipped upward.
I have never seen this happen and I doubt I ever will. Either the batter will hammer it into the ground, or the catcher's glove will be so low (anticipating catching the ball at ground level) that he won't come close to catching it if it's tipped upward.
the batter never swang at the ball nor did it hit his bat so I did not call it a strike. Just confused if its deadball(take first) or ball 1.
The original response to your question by coach2709 was correct.
Ok as for the the whole foul tip dead or not dead situation - here is my take on it and if it's completely wrong then please don't thrash me too bad.
If the batter swings at a ball that has bounced and foul tips the ball into the ground or anywhere other than directly into the catchers mitt then it's a dead ball. If the batter swings and foul tips the ball after it has hit the ground and the catcher squeezes it without it touching anything else then it's a live ball.
Now the likeihood of this happening is pretty remote and probably will never happen. Plus I would guess and say that a plate ump (and even a field ump) seeing these chain of events happening would be very difficult.
So how wrong am I?
If the batter swings at a ball that has bounced and foul tips the ball into the ground or anywhere other than directly into the catchers mitt then it's a dead ball. If the batter swings and foul tips the ball after it has hit the ground and the catcher squeezes it without it touching anything else then it's a live ball.
Now the likeihood of this happening is pretty remote and probably will never happen. Plus I would guess and say that a plate ump (and even a field ump) seeing these chain of events happening would be very difficult.
So how wrong am I?
quote:Originally posted by pilsner:
The original response to your question by coach2709 was correct.
Yeah I know this one because I got tossed over it once. And it was me who knew the rule and the ump didn't. I was highly agitated over it.
quote:Originally posted by coach2709:
Ok as for the the whole foul tip dead or not dead situation - here is my take on it and if it's completely wrong then please don't thrash me too bad.
If the batter swings at a ball that has bounced and foul tips the ball into the ground or anywhere other than directly into the catchers mitt then it's a dead ball. If the batter swings and foul tips the ball after it has hit the ground and the catcher squeezes it without it touching anything else then it's a live ball.
Now the likeihood of this happening is pretty remote and probably will never happen. Plus I would guess and say that a plate ump (and even a field ump) seeing these chain of events happening would be very difficult.
So how wrong am I?
Yes, it is an unlikely play and it would be a hard call to see all the aspects of the play, but sometimes you just have to umpire.
quote:but sometimes you just have to umpire.
Oh..how true.........this should be written on the first page of every rule book and mechanics manual.....
quote:Originally posted by coach2709:
If the batter swings at a ball that has bounced and foul tips the ball into the ground or anywhere other than directly into the catchers mitt...
So how wrong am I?
Just in terminology. You can't "foul tip" a ball "into the ground or anywhere other than directly into the catcher's mitt."
By definition, that would be a foul ball, not a foult tip.
quote:You can't "foul tip" a ball "into the ground or anywhere other than directly into the catcher's mitt." By definition, that would be a foul ball, not a foult tip.
A foul tip is nothing but a strike
No reason to signal it
No reason to treat it any different than any caught strike.
quote:Originally posted by Brilliant Mind:quote:You can't "foul tip" a ball "into the ground or anywhere other than directly into the catcher's mitt." By definition, that would be a foul ball, not a foult tip.
A foul tip is nothing but a strike
No reason to signal it
No reason to treat it any different than any caught strike.
Proper mechanic is to signal it.
quote:quote:
Originally posted by Brilliant Mind:
quote:
You can't "foul tip" a ball "into the ground or anywhere other than directly into the catcher's mitt." By definition, that would be a foul ball, not a foult tip.
A foul tip is nothing but a strike
No reason to signal it
No reason to treat it any different than any caught strike.
Proper mechanic is to signal it.
Agreed..........there is a signal mechanic for the call and I see it used at all levels of baseball....
Sometimes with players of a higher level, you may see umpire mechanics be somewhat less emphasized. (read MLB here)......I do not have that luxury, nor have I earned that luxury.......
Recently I saw AAA Salt Lake Bees game.......the umpire mechanics were crisp and to the point on book..........and they signal Foul tip....
The poster is right in the final analysis it is just a strike.........but there is a mechanic and a signal and we should use it.........
The reason for the signal is to let everyone know you had a touch on the bat. If not you get the questions from the dugout. Show it and everyone knows you have control of the plate.
quote:Originally posted by dash_riprock:quote:Originally posted by Brilliant Mind:quote:You can't "foul tip" a ball "into the ground or anywhere other than directly into the catcher's mitt." By definition, that would be a foul ball, not a foult tip.
A foul tip is nothing but a strike
No reason to signal it
No reason to treat it any different than any caught strike.
Proper mechanic is to signal it.
Question "proper mechanics" which add little to the quality of play and are performed because of historical reasons, not practical ones.
quote:Originally posted by Michael S. Taylor:
The reason for the signal is to let everyone know you had a touch on the bat. If not you get the questions from the dugout. Show it and everyone knows you have control of the plate.
I quit the foul tip mechanic years ago. On rare occasion have I been questioned as to whether a caught strike was foul-tipped or not. I respond with (almost always to a coach)..
"Yes, sir, foul tip"
The coach then is forced to think through his question.
I never have been asked twice in one game.
So what have you proven by making the coach think through his question?
It seems to me that one virtue of the foul tip mechanic is that it keeps the umpire in the habit of judging if the pitch is nicked or not. That's actually important when the pitch isn't caught.
Both our times are better served with other things.quote:Originally posted by coach2709:
So what have you proven by making the coach think through his question?
A foul tip is nothing but a strike
No reason to signal it
No reason to treat it any different than any caught strike.
What about the check swing that nicks the ball? I would like to know without having to ask if my guy took a swing, if the pitch was in the zone or if it was a foul tip.
Also, maybe the sound everybody heard could have possibly been catcher's interference instead of a foul tip.
There are plenty of good reasons why to do it. Those are the only two I could come up with and I am sure that others could of better ones.
Also, maybe the sound everybody heard could have possibly been catcher's interference instead of a foul tip.
There are plenty of good reasons why to do it. Those are the only two I could come up with and I am sure that others could of better ones.
quote:Both our times are better served with other things.
A foul tip is nothing but a strike
No reason to signal it
No reason to treat it any different than any caught strike.
The vast majority of us are associated with chapters and as such are subject to evaluation. In all my evaluations, the proper use of accepted signals is a requirement.
I understand your thoughts, but advocating applying individual mechanic options does not serve the majority of working umpires upon who the eval system applies to....
Umpries should check with their individual chapters to determine what mechanics are required or expected.
Does the offensive player have to make an effort to get out of the way of the ball even if he is in the batters box? Another random question... Do the corner infielders have to have both feet in fair territory when the ball is pitched?
Are you asking if the batter needs to try to avoid a pitched ball, the answer is yes in all codes except NCAA. They allow the batter to simply take a pitch with-in the confines of the box.
The corners do have to be in fair with a foot when the ball is pitched. It is a balk in Fed and a don't do that in all other codes. In every code the umpire isn't going to go looking for it. If asked about it he will enforce it equally for both teams. Also, being in fair means one foot touching the foul line.
The corners do have to be in fair with a foot when the ball is pitched. It is a balk in Fed and a don't do that in all other codes. In every code the umpire isn't going to go looking for it. If asked about it he will enforce it equally for both teams. Also, being in fair means one foot touching the foul line.
MST,
A minor nit-- in OBR a player needs to have both feet in fair ground. See PBUC 1.16, which also says don't do anything about it unless the offensive team complains.
Second thing: In NCAA, there is a penalty, but I wonder how often it would be invoked.
NCAA 5.4:
c. Other than the pitcher and catcher, all other fielders may position themselves anywhere in fair territory.
PENALTY for c.—The play, if it benefits the defense, shall be nullified. If it is an appeal play, the appeal is lost.
A minor nit-- in OBR a player needs to have both feet in fair ground. See PBUC 1.16, which also says don't do anything about it unless the offensive team complains.
Second thing: In NCAA, there is a penalty, but I wonder how often it would be invoked.
NCAA 5.4:
c. Other than the pitcher and catcher, all other fielders may position themselves anywhere in fair territory.
PENALTY for c.—The play, if it benefits the defense, shall be nullified. If it is an appeal play, the appeal is lost.
I stand corrected 3finger. However, even in OBR most only have one foul and many times that foot is touching the line. Touching counts as being in. I see many put their foot against the back of the bag. I consider it as being in fair. YMMV