Foul ball/batter squared
 

American Legion game yesterday using FED rules. Runners on 1st and 2nd, 0 out, 0-2 on the batter. Batter squares to bunt, and the pitch is right at his chest. The ball hits the bat, then the batter, then rolls into fair territory.

We have a dead ball/foul ball, count remains 0-2, because the batter did not attempt to bunt the ball, even though the pitch hit the bat. The batter was trying to get out of the way of the pitch.

Did we do right?

TriggerMN,

Good call, Blue! http://forum.officiating.com/images/icons/icon14.gif

Did you, by any chance, have the opportunity for an engaging conversation with either/both coaches as a result of your proper call?

Also, this is somewhat off-topic, but I had thought American Legion allowed leagues to choose between FED & OBR for "non-tournament play". I recently had occasion to look at the American Legion rules and couldn't find this. Could you clarify?

Thanks.

JM

CoachJM:
 

The National Director of American Legion Baseball has clearly declared that any game played under any rules other than the OBR modified American Legion Rules ARE NOT American Legion games.

In my neck of the woods the local American Legion Director informed teams that if they did not play Modified American Legion Rules they would not be eligible for Legion Playoffs.

The coaches in the PDX area said "fine" and notified the American Legion they were all dropping from AL play.

American Legion local officials then went back to last year's rule that the local teams could play Federation Rules UNTIL playoffs then they were required to play AL modified.

So the long answer to your question is that several areas in the US play what they call "American Legion" under Federation Rules. These same teams select to make a "last second" change and play American Legion Rules during playoffs.

Regards,

Tim,

Thanks for clarifying.

John
R.A.T.

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.

PWL,

I'm kind of breaking my own rules here, but, hey, nobody's perfect and I felt compelled to ask.

Did you receive your training at the Smith (nee Charles) or the Watterson school of umpiring?

JM

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.

A bunt requires intent, and intent requires the judgement of an umpire. If a batter holds his bat still over the plate, in the zone and a ball makes contact with it, I've got intent. If the batter has two strikes and that ball ends up foul, I've got an out.

If the pitch was at a batter and the ball makes contact with the bat, I don't generally have intent and this sounds like a plain old foul ball.

Now, you have to dig deep and pull out some judgement here. I have seen a batter, with a pitch straight at him, still try and bunt it. You've got to decide if he intentionally put his bat into the path of that ball.

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


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.

Short and to the point
 

I like it. The new Coach JM shouldn't care what the other UMPS think.
Buying the book, reading the book, using the book, all good.

If, in your opinion, he was not trying to bunt the ball when it hit the bat then good call. If I only read your first paragraph I would say "not enough info", but your second paragraph says "because the batter did not attempt to bunt the ball". If that's your opinion then he wasn't bunting so it's just a foul ball.