Quote:
Originally Posted by Manny A
Hmmm, interesting. I've always believed that if the batter steps out and then the pitcher commits an illegal pitch, the two violations cancel each other out and a No Pitch is declared. I can't see awarding the pitcher with a Strike when she does a leap or crow hop or other clear violation that may or may not have been affected by the batter's action.
IOW, if her pitch is legal by definition, then the strike is called no matter where the pitch ends up, and the ball remains live (unless something else requires us to kill it, such as if the pitch hits the batter, it goes into DBT, etc.) Conversely, if her pitch is not legal by definition, it's a No Pitch.
|
But that's not what the rule says either.
The rule reads:
If a pitch is not delivered, a rule has been violated by both the batter and the pitcher. The umpire shall call time, declare "no'pitch" and begin play anew.
I don't see how you can use the rulebook to get to no pitch if the ball is delivered. And if the ball is illegally delivered you don't seem to have the out of just calling it a strike. So the way I think the rule reads delivering an illegal pitch trumps stepping out. I don't think that was the intent of the rule but it seems to me that as written that's what it says.
As to what the intent is, I'm torn between what you've said and what MD has. He's going to call a strike when the pitcher throws overhand home; you're going to call no pitch. I have to feel like you're going to get less trouble with this approach. My other concern with calling it a strike is that if the pitch is illegal the BU is going to have that call. And if you've called it a strike because of the step out, it's going to be a mechanical mess.