Quote:
Originally posted by Kaliix
I thought it was one of those commom practice things that if the batter doesn't pull the bat back on a bunt, it's a strike.
Now, Rule 2-8-1 states..."A bunt is a fair ball in which the batter does not swing to hit the ball, but holds the bat in the path of the ball to tap it slowly to the infield."
If the batter holds the bat over the plate and doesn't draw it back as the pitch comes then he is attempting to hold the bat in the path of the ball in an attempt to bunt it. If he misses the ball, too bad, strike!
|
Nope, not too bad if you're using Fed rules. If a batter holds his bat at his waist for a bunt, and doesn't attemp to strike the pitch that hits the ground in front of the plate, then the rules plainly state that it's umpire discretion as to whether or not the ball was
struck at. If the bat wasn't carried past the body or a motion wasn't made towards the ball, then there is no strike, even if the bat is still there when the catcher gets it. Sure, you'll hear hell from the defensive coach, but it's in the rules.
Take a look in the Case Book. Rule 7-2-1 Situation C. A coach arguing whether or not the batter held his bat out is arguing strikes and balls. You have to be fair in that type of situation: there are kids out there who do know the rules and study them. I wouldn't be surprised if the occasional player knows that he can hold his bat out on a passed ball and still get a ball, or he can pull back nonchalantly when it's way outside and the catcher has to dive off the plate.
-Craig
Washington State