Runner Hit By Pitch

LDUB · #1 (**permalink**) Wed Feb 18, 2004, 03:34pm

I was looking at the dead ball table in my FED rule book today. So it says the ball is dead immedieatly when a pitch hits a runner. It got me thinking and I came up with a sistuation. R1 at third. Pitcher throws wild pitch which goes straight to the backstop. The ball rebounds off the backstop and rolls back towards home plate, and is unintentionally kicked by R1 who was running home. Is the ball dead?

greymule · #2 (**permalink**) Wed Feb 18, 2004, 04:05pm

I wouldn't consider it a pitch if it bounced off the backstop and hit the runner coming home.

Of course, if it bounced off the backstop and went into DBT, it would be considered a pitch.

I guess it would be treated as if it bounced off the catcher's mask. Straight off the catcher's mask into DBT, it's a pitch. Straight off the catcher's mask into a runner coming home, it's not a pitch.

Now I'll find out that this is covered in a case play and I'm wrong.

Buckeye12 · #3 (**permalink**) Wed Feb 18, 2004, 05:31pm

Very interesting question. I really don't think I'd consider this a pitch in my game, but, all I can find in the FED rulebook is this:

2-28-4:
...A pitch ends when:
a. the pitched ball is secured by the catcher
b. comes to rest.
c. goes out of play,
d. becomes dead.
e. or the batter hits the ball (other then a foul tip)

According to the rulebook, this would mean all runners advance one base from TOP. But, unless someone can show me a rule elsewhere to better explain this, I really don't think I'd consider this a "runner hit by pitch."

[Edited by Buckeye12 on Feb 19th, 2004 at 08:33 AM]

greymule · #4 (**permalink**) Wed Feb 18, 2004, 07:30pm

If that's a runner hit by pitch, then if the ball caroms back and hits the batter, it's a batter hit by pitch.

Cubbies87 · #5 (**permalink**) Wed Feb 18, 2004, 08:49pm

While I am basically making up my own rule rationale, here is why I would not consider a ball bouncing off the backstop and then contacting a runner a runner hit by pitch.

As Buckey12 cited from 2-28-4:
...A pitch ends when: b. comes to rest

While the ball may be moving, by contacting a solid object other than a player in the field of play, the pitch has come to rest.

To back up my claim, I will set up a scenario, no matter how ridiculous.

R1, R2, R3, one out, no count on the batter. F3 is playing way in to cover a bunt. B1 squares to bunt slightly early, and F3 charges hard. Pitch is wide and bounces off the backstop up the first baseline. F2 chases after it, but F3 picks up the ball, and flips it to F1. R1 and R2 break for 2nd and 3rd when they see the ball going to home without fielders checking their advance. F1 guns the ball to F5, but the throw is off and the ball goes out of play.

If the ball was still considered a pitch because the catcher never secured the ball, R1 would be placed on third and R2 would score because at the time of the pitch they were stationed at 1st and 2nd, and they are entitled to receive two bases from the time of the pitch.

However, by F3 throwing to F1, and then F1 throwing to F5, two plays have been made even though the ball was never batted or secured by the catcher. The 2nd play, being the throw to F5 which went out of play, would entitle both R1 and R2 two bases from the time of the throw, which would score not only R2, but also R1.

I would award according to the latter because the infield has made two plays, with the latter going out of play. By doing so, I am asserting that the pitch ended when it contacted the backstop. It is clear that the pitch was not secured by the catcher, go out of play (prior to two infield plays), become dead (prior to 2 infield plays), or be hit by the batter. That leaves only option B (coming to rest) to rule that the pitch ended (prior to 2 infield plays) when the ball contacted the backstop.

I played this scenario out in my mind, looked it over, and compared it with the FED rulebook, and I'm fairly certain it works. However, I recognize I am solving this as I would reason it to someone asking why I ruled a certain way, but my ruling could quite possibly be mistaken. If this helps, I'm glad. If not, PLEASE let me know where I went wrong.

soonerfan · #6 (**permalink**) Thu Feb 19, 2004, 03:41pm

look at it this way....if the catcher blocks a ball in the dirt and it bounces and touches the batter on the rebound, is it a HBP? no.

same goes for the backstop. so, no, it is not hitting the runner with the pitch. at least, that is how i rationalize it. :-)

Buckeye12 · #7 (**permalink**) Thu Feb 19, 2004, 05:02pm

I think we all know that this situation would not be runner or batter HBP. It's interesting though that according to the rulebook (if you apply it word for word) that this is HBP. Can any of you find it stated differently anywhere else?

bluezebra · #8 (**permalink**) Thu Feb 19, 2004, 10:20pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Cubbies87
While I am basically making up my own rule rationale, here is why I would not consider a ball bouncing off the backstop and then contacting a runner a runner hit by pitch.

As Buckey12 cited from 2-28-4:
...A pitch ends when: b. comes to rest

While the ball may be moving, by contacting a solid object other than a player in the field of play, the pitch has come to rest.

To back up my claim, I will set up a scenario, no matter how ridiculous.

R1, R2, R3, one out, no count on the batter. F3 is playing way in to cover a bunt. B1 squares to bunt slightly early, and F3 charges hard. Pitch is wide and bounces off the backstop up the first baseline. F2 chases after it, but F3 picks up the ball, and flips it to F1. R1 and R2 break for 2nd and 3rd when they see the ball going to home without fielders checking their advance. F1 guns the ball to F5, but the throw is off and the ball goes out of play.

If the ball was still considered a pitch because the catcher never secured the ball, R1 would be placed on third and R2 would score because at the time of the pitch they were stationed at 1st and 2nd, and they are entitled to receive two bases from the time of the pitch.

However, by F3 throwing to F1, and then F1 throwing to F5, two plays have been made even though the ball was never batted or secured by the catcher. The 2nd play, being the throw to F5 which went out of play, would entitle both R1 and R2 two bases from the time of the throw, which would score not only R2, but also R1.

I would award according to the latter because the infield has made two plays, with the latter going out of play. By doing so, I am asserting that the pitch ended when it contacted the backstop. It is clear that the pitch was not secured by the catcher, go out of play (prior to two infield plays), become dead (prior to 2 infield plays), or be hit by the batter. That leaves only option B (coming to rest) to rule that the pitch ended (prior to 2 infield plays) when the ball contacted the backstop.

I played this scenario out in my mind, looked it over, and compared it with the FED rulebook, and I'm fairly certain it works. However, I recognize I am solving this as I would reason it to someone asking why I ruled a certain way, but my ruling could quite possibly be mistaken. If this helps, I'm glad. If not, PLEASE let me know where I went wrong.

How can F3 THROW the ball WITHOUT controlling it?

Rest means to cease moving, not changing directions.

Bob

Cubbies87 · #9 (**permalink**) Thu Feb 19, 2004, 11:34pm

I never claimed F3 did not control the ball. I said that F2 never controlled the ball which in accordance to a word by word analysis of the rulebook would mean the ball was still "a pitch". I haven't reread my post, and if I mispoke, I apologize.

I agree the ball did not cease moving, but I can't find any other rationale other than the rulebook needs some revising, which is not what I would use to support my call.

bob jenkins · #10 (**permalink**) Fri Feb 20, 2004, 08:55am

Quote:

Originally posted by Buckeye12
I think we all know that this situation would not be runner or batter HBP. It's interesting though that according to the rulebook (if you apply it word for word) that this is HBP. Can any of you find it stated differently anywhere else?

This particular conundrum has been noted for many years.

Some similar situations can be resolved by noting the difference betwen a "pitch" and a "pitched ball" -- but not the situation that started this thread.

That said, no one will question the "not hit by pitch" ruling.

tiger49 · #11 (**permalink**) Fri Feb 20, 2004, 12:44pm

The ball comes to rest when it hits the backstop. For a brief moment the ball stops as the directional change occurs. This is like the old ruling concerning the pitcher's pause that was used in the 80's.

jicecone · #12 (**permalink**) Tue Feb 24, 2004, 09:37pm

Correct me if I am wrong here. In other words, a "pitch" as in Runner or Batter HBP,technically ends when is passes either at the plate. Although it does not officially end until it satisfies the criteria stated in 2.28-4. And, it is live unless intentionally interferred with by either the runner or batter-runner, while a fielder is attempting to make a play.

I based this on 2.28-2, "A live ball deliverd to the batter is a pitch".

w_sohl · #13 (**permalink**) Mon Mar 01, 2004, 03:24pm

For the ball to "change directions" it has to "cease moving". You can explain this using simple physics, take you car for example, you are driving forward down your street when you realize that you left your plate shoeson the dinning room table at home that you need for the game you are heading to. You are traveling at +20 MPH and decide that you need to BACK UP to get back home and get your shoes. To put the car in reverse you must slow from +20 MPH to 0 MPH the negatively accelerate to say -5 MPH. at that instant that you hit 0 MPH you have CEASED MOVEMENT.