|
Under no circumstance can the pitch result in a "batted ball."
If we allow a "batted ball" then we might as well ask this:
What if, while the pitch is halfway to the plate, the batter *throws* his bat at the pitch, making contact with the ball a good 30-feet in front of the plate, and the bat actually *hits* the ball?
These type of travesties of the game cannot be permitted and I think there is a good case for 9.01(c) to be invoked.
I think under all circumstances I would rule a "no pitch", kill the play, and admonish the batter to cease further similar activity or be subjected to an ejection.
I know there are those who believe that there is hardly ever a practical application of 9.01(c). But, in this case, I don't see what rule you would apply without making a foolish ruling by trying to tenuously adhere to some marginally-applicable rule.
And, by the way, I agree with Rich - I think TWP's can often provide a useful academic exericise that can frequently result in a deeper understanding of the rules.
Actually, the initial poster of this TWP obviously gave some thought into it by purposely interjecting some elements that hit upon some critical elements of the rules that would normally apply - albeit in a very bizarre scanerio.
If an umpire continually dismisses such silliness with a shrug of the shoulder and rationalizes, "That will *never* happen", there will come a time when something bizarre actually WILL happen in one of his games - and he'll be one of those "deer in the headlight" umpires.
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
|