Strikeout not credited?

[greymule]

1926 Pitchers are not credited with a strikeout if a batter reaches first base because of a wild pitch on the third strike

This rule change is listed on the Cosmic Baseball website (thanks, BigUmp56, for supplying the link). Many scoring changes are later rescinded, but apparently not this one.

So in MLB today, is a strikeout not credited on a wild pitch that allows the BR to reach 1B?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally posted by greymule
1926 Pitchers are not credited with a strikeout if a batter reaches first base because of a wild pitch on the third strike

This rule change is listed on the Cosmic Baseball website (thanks, BigUmp56, for supplying the link). Many scoring changes are later rescinded, but apparently not this one.

So in MLB today, is a strikeout not credited on a wild pitch that allows the BR to reach 1B?

I saw that too, and was wondering the same thing. I think that somewhere along the line, the rule was changed back to crediting the strikeout. Check out Rule 10.17(a)(3).

[DG]

Originally posted by greymule
1926 Pitchers are not credited with a strikeout if a batter reaches first base because of a wild pitch on the third strike

This rule change is listed on the Cosmic Baseball website (thanks, BigUmp56, for supplying the link). Many scoring changes are later rescinded, but apparently not this one.

So in MLB today, is a strikeout not credited on a wild pitch that allows the BR to reach 1B?

Item 433 in the BRD indicates that FED, NCAA, and OBR are now in agreement, so text deleted in 2000. 10.14(f)(1)(i) is is referenced for OBR scoring rule which says "when the third strike is a wild pitch, permitting the batter to reach first base, score a strikeouit and a wild pitch."

[DG]

Originally posted by Tim C
My question would be, "Why would any umpire even read Rule 10?"

It is not an umpire rule.

T

[Edited by Tim C on Nov 19th, 2005 at 04:08 PM]

I don't, unless asked a question comes up that that requires reading section 10. These questions generally come up on this forum only. If they come up on the field I generally say that I don't read section 10.

[Rich Ives]

Originally posted by Tim C
My question would be, "Why would any umpire even read Rule 10?"

It is not an umpire rule.

T

[Edited by Tim C on Nov 19th, 2005 at 04:08 PM]

Well, for one thing, a lot of playing rules are linked to when a runner is trying to steal and the only place that comes close to being defined is in rule 10.

For another, if you want to tell an official scorer he cannot divulge a BOOT, that's only in rule 10.

[briancurtin]

Originally posted by Tim C
My question would be, "Why would any umpire even read Rule 10?"

It is not an umpire rule.

T

[Edited by Tim C on Nov 19th, 2005 at 04:08 PM]

i could have sworn i posted in this thread already, but i guess it either did not work or i didnt do it, but this was my immediate thought.

[Rich Ives]

Tee

The ONLY place in OBR that it says an official scorer cannot notify a team of a BOOT is in rule 10. If you heard it at umpire school they were using 10.01 as the basis.

6.07 says: "The umpire shall not direct the attention of any person to the presence in the batter's box of an improper batter. This rule is designed to require constant vigilance by the players and managers of both teams"

Note the absence of an admonition to the official scorer.

The admonition to the official scorer is in 10.01(b)(5)
"The scorer shall not call the attention of the umpire or of any member of either team to the fact that a player is batting out of turn."


There is NO definition of "Steal" or "Stolen Base" anywhere in rules 1-9. The conditions of what constitutes a stolen base are in 10.08.

Being a coach does not mean one is wrong.

[umpduck11]

Originally posted by Rich Ives
Tee









There is NO definition of "Steal" or "Stolen Base" anywhere in rules 1-9. The conditions of what constitutes a stolen base are in 10.08.

Being a coach does not mean one is wrong.

I fail to see where it matters to me whether a base is
stolen or not. Either the runner is safe or out. I don't
want to argue, Rich, but why do I care if a runner is credited with a stolen base? I do not.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally posted by Tim C
No, but being a coach means you can add nothing to a discussion, or website, that is for umpires.

T

Are you usually this arrogant?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally posted by JugglingReferee

Are you usually this arrogant?

Are you new?

[GarthB]

Originally posted by Tim C
My question would be, "Why would any umpire even read Rule 10?"

It is not an umpire rule.

T

[Edited by Tim C on Nov 19th, 2005 at 04:08 PM]

There's a Rule 10? It must be one of those things coaches who think they're umpires read.

[Pete in AZ]

Originally posted by Tim C
No, but being a coach means you can add nothing to a discussion, or website, that is for umpires.

T

~sigh~

That post sounds awfully condescending and arrogant.

Sometimes it is just too easy.

What was the line? Oh yeah, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." This seems like a remarkable turn of events.

[greymule]

I didn't think that questions about scoring or Rule 10 were out of bounds on this forum. A while back somebody asked why umpires indicate "foul" on a foul fly that is caught. It's purely for scoring purposes.

[BigUmp56]

Pete,

There's a history between Tee and Rich. If you had been here a while, you would know that.

Keep picking nits, and soon you'll develop your own "history!"

Tim.

BTW- I'm still waiting for that little mail icon to appear at the end of your posts.

[Edited by BigUmp56 on Nov 20th, 2005 at 01:15 PM]

[GarthB]

Originally posted by Pete in AZ

~sigh~

That post sounds awfully condescending and arrogant.

Sometimes it is just too easy.

Arrogant? Sure. Maybe some pomposity added. A little bombastic, maybe. But condescending? No. In what language do you teach pre-law? And, if you get good enough, can you move from pre-law to law or even post-law?

"The most useless thing for an aspriring law student to study is pre-law. One should earn a degree in an actual discipline that will assist him in understanding his world. He will get all the law he needs in law school."

Antonin Scalia




[Edited by GarthB on Nov 20th, 2005 at 12:41 PM]