Strike signals

[Dave Hensley]

Originally posted by IHSAIllini
Okay, I understand the theory - however, it IS still strike three, according to the rules? If so, why is the verbal "strike three" discouraged if it's different than "batter's out"?

Bluezebra either misspoke or is suffering a senior moment. There is no problem verbalizing "strike three" on a called strike three. "Batter's out" is what you don't want to say, simply because getting into that habit opens the door to your saying it out of habit but incorrectly in a situation when the batter is NOT out on strike three.

This is kind of deja vu, isn't it?

[cowbyfan1]

Nothing wrong with giving the batters out when he/she is out along with the signal as well saying strike three or three but not "pumping" an out or saying out should be good enough for the realization that it is d3k. If an umpire has good timing then he/she should not get burned by saying batter out when that batter is out.

[bluezebra]

Originally posted by IHSAIllini
Okay, I understand the theory - however, it IS still strike three, according to the rules? If so, why is the verbal "strike three" discouraged if it's different than "batter's out"?

Who discourages saying, "Strike three"?

Bob

[IHSAIllini]

"The ONLY time to verbalize strike three"

I was referring to this by bluezebra, but I believe he meant "batter's out," which is what I do, so we're all in agreement!