[mcrowder]

Originally posted by SAump
As far as the LHP and RHP in the same half-inning goes; I thought the rule provides that a LHP or RHP must complete the half-inning before making the switch. The book does say a batter and not a half-inning.

What? "I thought the rule said X... the book says the opposite". What?!?!?!

Facing one bater LH and another RH might become too complicated because it raises too many issues.

What issues? Complicated to who? What an inane statement.

I suppose if an umpire shall require that the pitcher face a batter either LH or RH, it wouldn't be much of a step to REQUIRE him to complete the inning too.

Wouldn't be much of a step... about the same step as seeing that 3 strikes equals an out and taking the step to calling 2 strikes an out in your game. The rule is clear. Why ad lib at all?

I probably wouldn't allow it as a matter of safety.

If OBR or FED felt this was a safety issue, they would address it as such. You're making things up again.

I wouldn't want him to get hurt wearing the wrong glove and all.

Nice of you to have concern. I'm sure the pitcher is quite capable of either switching gloves, or having one made for him (Monte Williams, if that was indeed his name, had a legal, approved glove that he could simply swap from one hand to the other)

Would I charge the coach with a visit to the mound? Does the team lose the DH? Does he get another 8 warm up pitches?

No - why - when did the coach visit the mound. No - why would the team lose the DH just because a pitch was thrown with 2 different hands in the same inning. Completely irrelevant. No - decent question there, but with a precedent set for us to follow. The pitcher only gets his normal allowed warmups - he can throw them with whatever hand he wants to throw them with.

I rather say NO and TOSS the coach because I said SO. After all his pitcher wouldn't be properly equipped. But if the NCAA/NFHS would like to bail out the defense once again and pass the rule in favor of it, and put it in the rule book in black and white.

OOO. So now you decide on which rules to use? You would never work again around here. I'm sure the pitcher would be properly equiped - it's not like this (pitching both-handed) is a spur of the moment decision by the pitcher. If he wasn't properly equipped - fine, deal with that on its own. This IS in the rulebook - no need to pass a new rule.

To hear that it was done at the MLB level is fascinating. Was it part of the marketing plan to get the fans back in the bleachers. Pitchers at that level throw a large number of pitches and put a lot of stress on their arm just warming up. I wouldn't think he had the time to properly warm-up from both sides. Would his numbers (STATS) be any better than any of the other 7-12 pitchers waiting in the bullpen? I guess their set-up men and closers all suck. Did the club announce the pitching change over loud speakers? Now in for #97 is #97. Sounds too good to be true. Imagine the indorsements for ambidextrous gloves when your the only player in MLB that needs to use it. Chicks dig the ambidextrous handling.

It was only AA - he never made it further as far as I heard. It was not marketing - this guy pitched just as well with each arm, and he based his handedness on the handedness of the next batter. The rule regarding not switching DURING a batter was actually put in SPECIFICALLY after this pitcher and a switch hitter had a standoff and the umpire (who ruled with the eventual rule anyway, but had no rulebook to back him up at the time) had to do something just to get the game going. This guy was a starter, and from all I heard, pitched deep into the game sometimes simply because he had half the wear and tear on the arm that a normal pitcher would have. There were games where he simply was having a bad day one way or the other, and he'd stick with the other hand.