Foul ball/batter squared

[bobbybanaduck]

what do you mean it doesn't matter? of course it matters. a bunt, by definition, must be intentionally met. if there is no intent (i.e. attempting to get out of the way) there is no bunt.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by PWL

Please explain your defininition of a bunt.

That is what I was trying to convay is my previous post.

I was saying as long as he had the bat down and in the bunt position and the ball hit the bat it was a foul ball and strike three. If he was attempting to vacant the batter's box and pulling the bat back and making no attempt at a bunt, I would have a foul ball.

Holding the bat down in the bunt position doesn't constitute an attempt in and of itself. So, if he holds the bat still or pulls it back, it's a foul ball and cannot be called a third strike.


Tim.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by PWL

Yeah, if the ball doesn't hit the bat. How many times have you seen a pitch go over a batters head and hit his bat. He didn't offer or swing, but it is still a strike nonetheless.

Sure, it's a strike. It just can't be strike three. If it happens as you've described 5 times in a row the most you will have is two strikes

Originally Posted by PWL

So in actually in what your saying, if a batter squared and stands still and motionless, doesn't offer at the ball, and the ball hits any part of his bat with two strikes, we have a foul ball. Very interesting.

Pretty much that's exactly what I'm saying. You have to judge that the batter offered at the pitch. If he just holds the bat out over the plate without making any attempt to strike at the ball and the ball hits the bat and goes foul, that's all it is. A foul ball, and no more than strike two.


Tim.