Out or no out #2
 

The thread "out or no out" reminded me of a similar discussion several years ago on McGriff. In that discussion, there was a runner on 1st. The batter hit a ball up the middle. The shortstop got to the ball and tagged the base with the ball in his bare hand before the runner arrived.

Assuming nothing but the ball touched the base, do we have an out or not?

Please, everyone with a brain stop answering this question. I can't believe this is even an issue ... much less an issue in 9 different threads that comes up in a new one daily. Stupid. Just stupid.

Another question...
 

I've been thinking about another sitch as well....

If a batter swings and misses at a pitch that was not in the strike zone, is it still a strike? :rolleyes:

Let's put an end to it once and for all:

If a defensive player has possession of the ball and touches a base in a force out situation with his hand, glove, foot, elbow, head, genetalia, etc. before the runner touches the base, the runner is OUT.

I note you failed to include "ball" in your list.

No he didn't...:D

Is the hand part of the glove?

Genitalia? I'd pay to see that!

What if his hair only touched the bag?:confused: Out?

PS- don't laugh too quickly. There was a basketball case play put out last year confirming that a player was out-of-bounds if they were lying on the court and their hair touched a side or end line. Seriously.

How do you it was a "he"?:confused:

My bad... no (s)he didn't.

I'd pay to see that too. :D

The question is
Is the ball part of the hand?

If so, then a pitched ball that hits the hands should not be a HBP.:)

Maybe thats a new "myth" that needs to be exploited. I think the BALL is part of your hand which is totally different than the HANDS being part of the BAT.

Well, when I was a teenager, mine were . . . .

If he touches the base with his genitals, I am ejecting him. But, there would be an out, first.