This past weekend the opposing team on one of my sons games pitched one of our batters inside and ended up hitting our batters hands while he is holding the bat then he dropped the bat. He didn't turn on it or make an attempt to swing but the ump said it was a foul ball because the hands are part of the bat. Our player lost a fingernail from this, so it definitely did hit his hand and the ump didn't argue that fact but he still said it was a foul ball. Was this the right call?

The hands are not part of the bat.

NO!

The ball should of been immediately called dead and BR awarded 1st base.

If B1 swung at the pitch and the ball hit his hand/s, the ball would be dead but batter remains at bat.

What if the batter swung at strike three and the pitch hit his hand. Dead ball and a strikeout. Correct???

Correct

If you swing the bat your hands are part of the bat, right? But if you don't swing there not, if I'm not mistaken, so if the batter swung at strike 3 and it hit his hands wouldn't it just be a foul ball and the at bat would continue? But if it hit his arm or side it would be strike 3, with it being a dead ball meaning no drop 3rd strike rule. Tell me if I'm wrong but from what I've read I think I might be right.

What the hell have you been reading? Certainly not the rule book. But we can help.

Repeat after me: The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat. The hands are not part of the bat.

<b>EVER</v>

Garth, I don't think that was necessary. If batter swings at pitch it is a strike, if ball hits hands as he swings it is a dead ball strike not a foul ball. The reason is that when the ball hits the batter it is an immediate dead ball. The decision is whether he swung the bat or not. Same holds with a bunting situation. If he squares and attempts to bunt but ball hits him in the gut, we have a dead ball strike. If he doesn't attempt to bunt we have a dead ball, batter is awarded first (unless you deem that he made no attempt to get out of the way of the pitch).

But are the hands part of the bat? <b>NO! Never. Not under any condition.</b>

You don't think it's necessary to emphasize that the hands are not part of the bat when the question is asked nearly everyday on one site or another?

You don't think it's necessary to emphasize that the hands are not part of the bat when an umpire has told a parent that they are?

I do.

This should be added to my previous thread entitled "Misconceptions" or whatever..... haha

B1 is crowding the plate. Fastball down the inside, hits B1 hands as he attempts to bail out. No swing. I have a dead ball, strike three with no swing.

Correct call?

Depends. Was he in the strike zone when he was hit? How many stikes did he have before the pitch?

Garth is correct, if the pitch was a strike, then if it hits him, dead ball strike.

That so-called umpire needs some serious training.

Sorry to cause such a fuss. I knew it would be a dead ball strike but I didn't think you could get strike three on it. Guess I was wrong. Thanks for answering the question.