whats the rulebook say

[SAump]

Originally Posted by NFump

6.05 A batter is out when: (h) After hitting or bunting a fair ball, his bat hits the ball a second time in fair territory....etc, etc. This doesn't have anything to do with the original sitch. Wrong rule cite.

An intentionally thrown bat and a carelessly thrown bat only have one thing in common. However, neither has anything to do with the original sitch. Another incorrect rule cite.

Bold letters are more appealing than ALL CAPS. What I'd really like you to do is read the rule book at least once. It would really help with the incorrect rule cites. Thanks in advance and have a nice day.

-----------
Try reading the entire RULE 6.05.h. You don't twist my words, you cut them short to your advantage. Perhaps the BOLDNESS of this statement will clarify things for YOU. After stating there is nothing SIMILAR about my statements, are your going to acuse me of making up the rules like your PARTNERS do?
---
(h) After hitting or bunting a fair ball, his bat hits the ball a second time in fair territory. The ball is dead and no runners may advance. If the batter runner drops his bat and the ball rolls against the bat in fair territory and, in the umpire's judgment, there was no intention to interfere with the course of the ball, the ball is alive and in play; If a bat breaks and part of it is in fair territory and is hit by a batted ball or part of it hits a runner or fielder, play shall continue and no interference called. If batted ball hits part of broken bat in foul territory, it is a foul ball. If a whole bat is thrown into fair territory and interferes with a defensive player attempting to make a play, interference shall be called, whether intentional or not. In cases where the batting helmet is accidentally hit with a batted or thrown ball, the ball remains in play the same as if it has not hit the helmet. If a batted ball strikes a batting helmet or any other object foreign to the natural ground while on foul territory, it is a foul ball and the ball is dead. If, in the umpire's judgment, there is intent on the part of a baserunner to interfere with a batted or thrown ball by dropping the helmet or throwing it at the ball, then the runner would be out, the ball dead and runners would return to last base legally touched.
---
"An intentionally thrown bat and a carelessly thrown bat only have one thing in common. However, neither has anything to do with the original sitch."

Again, another foolish assertion on your part and entirely incorrect. One has everything to do with the original sitch and the other is entirely SIMILAR to the first, unlike the HR comment which you are defending so vigorously.
---
"Another incorrect rule cite."

I have only cited 3 rules and all 3 pertain to the original sitch as enforced by the UMPIRES on the playing field at the time. I was NOT there. I am only pointing OUT how those umpires who were there may believe their actions were RIGHT {FED Rules 2-21 and 7-3-6}. I merely quoted MLB OBR 6.05.h when a very respected member asked about the ruling authority (OBR).

You may agree with others that these rule may have been improperly enforced. Those who disagree were not there and must know the GULF BREEZE version of events was a tainted version of the events. The TRUE version of events has yet to appear on this thread, so we may never really know what may have happened.

In the meantime, I have correctly pointed out the discrepancy in the rulings between one set of rules and another in the SAME rulebook affected the play on the actual ballfield. If more experienced and brighter minds than me do not want to change the rule book to address the conflicting interpretations, then so be it. It is so easy to let it go at that. But if those umpires got the call wrong and it was such a simple call to make; then someone TALLER than me should address the issue.

[SAump]

Let's no longer expect our athletes (some as young as 8 years old) to take responsibility for their actions. We can always ask others to help bail them out of any difficult situation. And we ask ourselves why athletes behave as they do.

You guys are clueless.

[SAump]

Did the batter by carelessly releasing the bat and hitting the catcher initiate malicious contact?

If NO, why the ejection and not the warning?

If YES, then by RULE 3-3-n the proper call was made on the field.

PENALTY: The umpire shall eject the offender from the game. Failure to comply shall result in in the game being forfeited. In (n), the ejected player is declared OUT, unless he has already scored.
------------------
I will now leave this thread UP for further comment from the general audience. Out of respect for my non-involvement, please no longer address me in any of your comments. My opinion has been stated and is well known. As I stated earlier, I NO LONGER agree with your interpretation of an accident that results in serious injury. The batter is responsible for his actions which includes safely releasing the bat. I am not ruling on a carelessly thrown bat. I am ruling on a bat that makes serious CONTACT with the catcher or UMPIRE (MALICIOUS). That B/R is OUT immediately and ejected for MC. The runner's are returned to bases at TOP unless it is the third OUT.
Best wishes and have a pleasant week.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by SAump

Did the batter by carelessly releasing the bat and hitting the catcher initiate malicious contact?

If NO, why the ejection and not the warning?

If YES, then by RULE 3-3-n the proper call was made on the field.

PENALTY: The umpire shall eject the offender from the game. Failure to comply shall result in in the game being forfeited. In (n), the ejected player is declared OUT, unless he has already scored.
------------------
I will now leave this thread UP for further comment from the general audience. Out of respect for my non-involvement, please no longer address me in any of your comments. My opinion has been stated and is well known. As I stated earlier, I NO LONGER agree with your interpretation of an accident that results in serious injury. The batter is responsible for his actions which includes safely releasing the bat. I am not ruling on a carelessly thrown bat. I am ruling on a bat that makes serious CONTACT with the catcher or UMPIRE (MALICIOUS). That B/R is OUT immediately and ejected for MC. The runner's are returned to bases at TOP unless it is the third OUT.
Best wishes and have a pleasant week.

You're considering a thrown bat malicious content?

Good thing you won't respond to me calling you the biggest idiot I've ever seen on this board. And that's saying quite a bit.

[NFump]

You're leaving? Ahhh, I see. Well, you just keep on calling them anyway you feel. Rulebook? You don't need no stinking rulebook. Hec, you don't even need to use the correct rule set, just throw any old rules into the mix, them coaches don't know no better anyhow. You have a good day and a better tomorrow.

[RPatrino]

It's time to delete this insane thread. Sometimes I feel like I should be handing out medication instead of answering baseball questions.

Sheeze.

Bob P.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

It's time to delete this insane thread. Sometimes I feel like I should be handing out medication instead of answering baseball questions.

Sheeze.

Bob P.

Self-medication?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by SAump

I will now leave this thread UP for further comment from the general audience.

I think that it's impossible for a fastball to rise.

[umpduck11]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

I think that it's impossible for a fastball to rise.

Unless a "scab" throws it.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by SAump

Let's no longer expect our athletes (some as young as 8 years old) to take responsibility for their actions. We can always ask others to help bail them out of any difficult situation. And we ask ourselves why athletes behave as they do.

You guys are clueless.

Yep, everyone here is totally clueless except for you, SA! That's the ticket.

[RPatrino]

Self medicate? I want what he's smokin'!!!!!

[SAump]

3.3.1 SITUATION E: After hitting a line drive toward F5, B1 releases the bat, which strikes F2 or the umpire. The act was judged by the umpire to be (a) intentional

Ruling: In (a), the offender will be ejected from the game. If his fair hit ball is a base hit, he will be replaced with a substitute runner.
--------------------
Sitch: A team is winning or losing 22 -7

Earlier you eject a player or coach for arguing balls and stikes.

The team "idol" comes to the plate and just misses a HOME RUN swing.
The ball dribbles out toward 3B.
The batter knows the probable result is an out so he throws the bat in anger.
The third baseman makes a bad throw and the batter reaches on an error.
You eject this player for intentionally hitting the catcher or UMP with a BAT and then you allow a SUB to take his place.
You guys are either TOO NICE or clueless!
That is MC.
LMAOFTS

[BigUmp56]

I just got home from a 9 inning marathon game. The pitching was, shall we say, undesirable on both sides. After the game my partner and I decided to stop by the local watering hole and drown a few brewski's, so admittedly I may be a little slow on the uptake tonight. Is it just me or does this last post by the San Antonio genius seem extra unintelligible even by his standards?



Tim.

[LMan]

www.antimoon.com

[TussAgee11]

One of the more entertaining threads we've had in a while, wouldn't you all say?

I feel like I'm hitting myself with a heavy book in the head over and over in the head, or I'm listening to Disco Music.

This is why it is sometimes hard to read this board, yet when I do, I seem to get some good laughs, but don't learn how to be a better umpire as much as I want to. I'm only 2nd year, so I do enjoy reading peoples interpretations on things, but I dislike reading total disregards for the rules. Maybe its time to start the use of the ignore feature.