whats the rulebook say

[GarthB]

[QUOTE=SAump]

Originally Posted by gulf breeze

-------------

Batter is out for interference. If it is the third out then the runs are wiped out too because the runs had not crossed the plate at the time the out occurred.

The batter is ejected if there was malicious contact. The batter is DQ from the rest of the tourney as a result of the ejection.

Your personal comments were not warranted, you may acompany the batter to the parking lot.

Now, had you been more willing to discuss the situation like a REAL man, then the batter may have gotten away with a warning depending on the league rules. Tourney rules are different.

After reading your comments about me, I say YOU GOT what YOU DESERVE.

Please explain why the batter is out for interference.

[SAump]

[QUOTE=GarthB]

Originally Posted by SAump

Please explain why the batter is out for interference.

By rule, "ART. 1 . . . Offensive interference is an act (physical or verbal) by the team at bat: b. When a runner makes malicious contact with any fielder, with or without the ball, in or out of the baseline."

I was in a heated discussion about interference with DG and WINDY when the catcher threw the ball on a stolen base attempt and it deflected off the bat thrown by the batter after ball four. Well if a bat harmlessly flying through the air may cause interference with a catcher attempting to make a play, I believe a bat that decks the catcher who is not attempting to make any play is also grounds for interference. JMOHO.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by SAump

By rule, "ART. 1 . . . Offensive interference is an act (physical or verbal) by the team at bat: b. When a runner makes malicious contact with any fielder, with or without the ball, in or out of the baseline."

I guess if this was a FED game and in your judgment a carelessly discared bat constituted MC you would be within your rights to call interference. The rest of us would use the proper rule and the prescribed penalty.


FED 3-3

1 - A coach, player, substitute, attendant or other bench personnel shall not:

b. carelessly throw a bat,

PENALTY: At the end of playing action, the umpire shall issue a warning to the coach of the team involved and the next offender on that team shall be ejected.

Originally Posted by SAump

I was in a heated discussion about interference with DG and WINDY when the catcher threw the ball on a stolen base attempt and it deflected off the bat thrown by the batter after ball four. Well if a bat harmlessly flying through the air may cause interference with a catcher attempting to make a play, I believe a bat that decks the catcher who is not attempting to make any play is also grounds for interference. JMOHO.

Sorry, your interpretation doesn't jive with the rules. First off if the catcher wasn't attempting to retire anyone there would be nothing to interfere with. Second, if the catcher were trying to play on a runner, intent is required to call interference on a thrown ball. A carelessly discarded bat does not constitute intent.



Tim.

[SAump]

Right back at ya -> "What I see is a carelessly discarded bat and an umpire with a limited understanding of the rules of youth baseball."

I agree with your rule interepretations for minor infractions of carelessly throwing a bat. A batter tossed a bat backwards and glanced off the catcher's or UMPIRE'S protective equipment (ala the Delmond Young incident). Was anyone really hurt? A simple bench warning and ejection on the next occurence may suffice.

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.

[BigUmp56]

Your logic is flawed. You're trying to equate why a bat was thrown to what happened after the bat was thrown. There is a distinction between the two.

Just as you cannot say that you judged a thrown bat to be a flagrant unsportsmanlike action that warranted no penalty if it didn't cause serious injury, you cannot say that a bat judged as being thrown carelessly warrants a more severe penalty than what the rules allow if it did cause serious injury.


Tim.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

Your logic is flawed. You're trying to equate why a bat was thrown to what happened after the bat was thrown. There is a distinction between the two.

Just as you cannot say that you judged a thrown bat to be a flagrant unsportsmanlike action that warranted no penalty if it didn't cause serious injury, you cannot say that a bat judged as being thrown carelessly warrants a more severe penalty than what the rules allow if it did cause serious injury.

Tim.

Same situation, less than two outs, batter hits a grounder to third who fields it cleanly and comes up to throw home to prevent the run from scoring. The catcher is on the ground holding his left elbow after a carelessly thrown bat. The 3B throws the ball to 1B to retire the batter. Does the run score?

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by SAump

Same situation, less than two outs, batter hits a grounder to third who fields it cleanly and comes up to throw home to prevent the run from scoring. The catcher is on the ground holding his left elbow after a carelessly thrown bat. The 3B throws the ball to 1B to retire the batter. Does the run score?

Yes, why wouldn't it? This I have to hear.


Tim.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

I guess if this was a FED game and in your judgment a carelessly discared bat constituted MC you would be within your rights to call interference. The rest of us would use the proper rule and the prescribed penalty.


FED 3-3

1 - A coach, player, substitute, attendant or other bench personnel shall not:

b. carelessly throw a bat,

PENALTY: At the end of playing action, the umpire shall issue a warning to the coach of the team involved and the next offender on that team shall be ejected.




Sorry, your interpretation doesn't jive with the rules. First off if the catcher wasn't attempting to retire anyone there would be nothing to interfere with. Second, if the catcher were trying to play on a runner, intent is required to call interference on a thrown ball. A carelessly discarded bat does not constitute intent.



Tim.

-----------------

The ruling you mention applies to any person who carelessly throws the bat back toward his own dugout or who may carelessly throw a bat back towards the opponents dugout. The rule is in place to protect those who are not paying attention from be struck and seriously injured. Read "A coach, player, substitute, attendant or other bench personnel shall not:"
YOU will notice the word batter and runner are missing.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by SAump

-----------------

The ruling you mention applies to any person who carelessly throws the bat back toward his own dugout or who may carelessly throw a bat back towards the opponents dugout. The rule is in place to protect those who are not paying attention from be struck and seriously injured.

Now that's certainly making things up as you go along.


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 or (b) unintentional.

Ruling: In (a) and (b), this is a delayed dead-ball situation. 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.

In (b), the umpire will warn the coach of that player's team that the next player on that team to violate the rule shall be ejected from the game.



Tim.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

Now that's certainly making things up as you go along.


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 or (b) unintentional.

Ruling: In (a) and (b), this is a delayed dead-ball situation. 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.

In (b), the umpire will warn the coach of that player's team that the next player on that team to violate the rule shall be ejected from the game.



Tim.

Please tell me what part of the above case play don't you understand? You should note that in (a) above the intentional act does not warrant an out call. The batter-runner is ejected and then replaced on the bases.

Tim.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

Please tell me what part of the above case play don't you understand?


Tim.

"A Batter shall NOT:
Art. 6 ... If a whole bat is thrown and interferes with a defensive player attempting to make a play, interference WILL be called."

PENALTY: For infraction of Art. 6, the batter is out and runners return. If, in the umpire's judgement, interference prevented a possible double play, two players may be ruled out.

Help yourselves.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by SAump

-----------------

The ruling you mention applies to any person who carelessly throws the bat back toward his own dugout or who may carelessly throw a bat back towards the opponents dugout. The rule is in place to protect those who are not paying attention from be struck and seriously injured. Read "A coach, player, substitute, attendant or other bench personnel shall not:"
YOU will notice the word batter and runner are missing.

A rule also allows for the immediate ejection of a batter or runner who intentionally throws his helmet or bat down at the ground or at a fence or wall in a violent manner. No warnings and no ADDITIONAL OUTS are allowed by rule (EX: Out on called 3rd strike and another out for throwing both helmet and bat in dispute of bad call).

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by SAump

A rule also allows for the immediate ejection of a batter or runner who intentionally throws his helmet or bat down at the ground or at a fence or wall in a violent manner. No warnings and no ADDITIONAL OUTS are allowed by rule (EX: Out on called 3rd strike and another out for throwing both helmet and bat in dispute of bad call).

There's also a rule that allows for a batted ball that leaves the playing field in flight over fair territory to be ruled a homerun. Now tell me what either your example or my example has to do with a carelessly thrown bat. Both examples are just as obsolete to the play at hand. You're grasping at straws again. No, I would say you're grasping at thin air.


Tim.



Tim.

[RPatrino]

SAUmp,

Please provide me the name of your pharmacist or subscribing physician. I need some of what you are taking!! Where do you come up with some of the stuff you say?

Do you call strikes on batter's if the offensive team is not in the bench area? Any other situations where we can get some easy outs?

Bob P.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

There's also a rule that allows for a batted ball that leaves the playing field in flight over fair territory to be ruled a homerun. Now tell me what either your example or my example has to do with a carelessly thrown bat. Both examples are just as obsolete to the play at hand. You're grasping at straws again. No, I would say you're grasping at thin air.

Tim.

Tim.

What part of carelessly thrown bat do you not understand? The penalty.
YOU quoted rule 3-3 which vaguely applies to everybody on the field.
You'll have difficulty applying a rule that addresses the both coaches, players and attendants from both teams.
Where did you get that 3-3-E scenario? I suggest you find another part of the rule book if you want to address my concerns. Bench and Field Conduct may cover the subsequent action which follows.

I quoted rule 2-21. The penalty for interference is an OUT.
The batter is responsible for his bat making contact with the catcher.
I have no qualms about enforcing a rule that actually addresses the batter's inappropriate actions, such as 7-3 ART 6.