Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn
That seems surprising to me. She didn't think she swung the bat, so she didn't run. You can't hold it against her that she didn't think she swung, given that YOU didn't think she swung either. If you say there is no circumstance where you would give her first on a play like this - you are giving an advantage to the defense - because if she DOES run, then the defense gets to see, first, whether they will be able to get her out at first before they have to decide if they are going to appeal the check swing. In your world, the batter runner can NEVER achieve first base on a pitch that PU doesn't call a swing - because if she does, the defense will simply not appeal. This is a disadvantage to the batter on any potential 3rd strike pitch where the swing is borderline and you don't call it a swing - a disadvantage not intended by the rules.
|
So you give a free base to the batter that did swing, in the judgment of the base umpire, whether the PU called it first or not, when she 1) did swing at the pitch, 2) has to know she is at least borderline and in possible jeopardy, 3) doesn't run to protect herself against being called out. So she has no accountability for these three failures.
Yet, you would award this base because the defense sinned by (what, exactly)?? The catcher not catching the pitch the batter struck out on (the most common are balls in the dirt, 42' drops or changeups, and high rises; they fooled the batter, and now you make the catcher accountable??), and not appealing before they complete playing the ball (why would they; if the batter isn't running, no reason on their part to ask yet)?
This makes the best argument for a base umpire to NEVER call it a swing, because the result is WAY worse than "missing" the swing. Because I see your argument as giving an unintended and undeserved award to the batter who struck out, and did nothing to protect herself. This is as inconceivable to me as unringing the incorrect "foul ball" bell.