Hit By Rebounded Pitch (Fed Only)

[Blue37]

The pitcher bounced an inside curve ball. The batter got out of the way and the catcher blocked the pitch, which then rebounded to hit the batter. The coach wanted the batter awarded first, and said it happened in one of their games earlier in the year. I told him that, just because someone called it earlier, it would not happen in my game and I kept the batter in the box.

After the game, I got into the book to make sure I was correct, and now I am somewhat confused. The definition of when the pitch ends does not include "when the pitch strikes the catcher". The definition of hit by pitch does not exclude a rebounded pitch.

The BRD did not help. It stated, for NCAA and OBR, that the batter must be in his normal hitting stance, and it is easy to say that, once the ball passed him and struck the catcher, he was no longer in his normal hitting stance, but there is no such statement for Fed.

I am comfortable with my ruling, but I would like something to hang my hat on other than a feeling. Remember that my question is for Fed only.

[scyguy]

looked in rule book but did not find anything I thought directly applied to this unique situation. Bob probably can reference something. Common sense, however, dictates that the batter will not be awarded first. I dont believe that the ball is even dead, but could be wrong. 5-1-1a states that a ball is dead when a "pitch" touches a batter. I don't believe that a rebounded ball from catcher would fall under the category of a pitch.

[jicecone]

Originally posted by Blue37
The pitcher bounced an inside curve ball. The batter got out of the way and the catcher blocked the pitch, which then rebounded to hit the batter. The coach wanted the batter awarded first, and said it happened in one of their games earlier in the year. I told him that, just because someone called it earlier, it would not happen in my game and I kept the batter in the box.

After the game, I got into the book to make sure I was correct, and now I am somewhat confused. The definition of when the pitch ends does not include "when the pitch strikes the catcher". The definition of hit by pitch does not exclude a rebounded pitch.

The BRD did not help. It stated, for NCAA and OBR, that the batter must be in his normal hitting stance, and it is easy to say that, once the ball passed him and struck the catcher, he was no longer in his normal hitting stance, but there is no such statement for Fed.

I am comfortable with my ruling, but I would like something to hang my hat on other than a feeling. Remember that my question is for Fed only.

I'm going to take a stab at this Blue37.

A pitch ends when the catcher secures a pitched ball or (unwritten), fails to secure the ball. At that time it becomes a "passed ball" as in 2.26.1.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Blue37
I am comfortable with my ruling, but I would like something to hang my hat on other than a feeling. Remember that my question is for Fed only.

The "explanation" involves some word parsing, but:

A batter is awarded first when he's hit by a "pitched ball" -- not a "pitch." The term "pitched ball" isn't defined, so we get to make it up. My definition is that a pitched ball is the same as a pitch, but ends when the ball passes the batter. So, no base.