Batter out of box

[bluezebra]

Originally Posted by mrm21711

Dead runners return. Does it make sense that the ball could still be live if it was batted illegally?

What happens to live runners?

Bob

[mcrowder]

Somewhere over 1500 games - 0 calls of this kind for me as well.

For those of you that seem to think this is some kind of flaw in an umpire that he's not calling this, let me ask you two questions:

1) at the moment that you see the foot contacting the ground outside the box, where is the pitch? I cannot believe any peripheral vision nonsense, as this is about 45 degrees apart, and one or the other would be in your extreme peripheral vision unless you were actually looking at NEITHER the ball or the foot. Isn't it more important for you to know where the pitch is than the foot?

2) Truly, except for some extremely bizarre circumstance (I don't know, say a slap hitter taking 4 steps toward the pitcher before hitting it), is there any advantage gained by the batter's foot being marginally outside that box?

Note that I am not saying we should intentionally ignore a rule - what I'm saying is that A) it's impossible to do your duties and also see this violation, and B) if you're going to miss one or the other, isn't it better to miss the one for which there is no advantage gained?

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by LLPA13UmpDan

But I dont know how you guys stand behind the plate, but i can see the pitch and the batters feet too.

At the moment contact is made between ball and bat, the only moment that counts for being out of the batter's box, your full focus is, or should be, solely on the pitch. Saying that you can tell, peripherally, at the exact same time, that the foot is both out of the box and grounded is either incorrect or an indication that you are not performing your primary duty at that time to your fullest potential.

[UmpJM]

I've been following this thread of discussion, and I've got a question.

Having (re)read J/R and JEA on the question, this strikes me as a legitimate rule which can, in certain situations, have a material impact on the "balance of the game" between offense and defense. Namely, during an IBB, a pitch-out with runners attempting to advance, or a batter (especially LH) attempting to drag bunt for a basehit. So, I'm suggesting that this rule means what it says, and, at least in some situations, really should be called, especially if the violation is "blatant" rather than "borderline".

Now, a number of the distinguished umpires have suggested that they simply would not be able to see this happen, because they are focused on calling the pitch. OK, let's just "buy that" for the time being.

What about if you're a BU in a two-man crew? Wouldn't seem that hard to see if it were blatant and occurred in one of the three situations I mentioned.

What say you?

JM

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by LLPA13UmpDan

No i dont let them. I just try to keep the game fair, and play by the rules.

All of them? Exactly as worded?

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by CoachJM

What about if you're a BU in a two-man crew? Wouldn't seem that hard to see if it were blatant and occurred in one of the three situations I mentioned.

What say you?

JM

As a coach who could be on either side of this call, do you really want me, from 105' away, to exercise my opinion if a foot is grounded at the time of a hit when I am concentrating on the swing and the ball? Really?

[UmpJM]

Garth,

If it's obvious/blatant and a situation where the offense gains a material advantage (as in the three situations described earlier), I think I WOULD want you to call it were I the defensive manager. Were I the offensive manager in the same situation, I wouldn't WANT you to call it, but you certainly wouldn't hear a peep out of me if you did.

JM

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by CoachJM

Garth,

If it's obvious/blatant and a situation where the offense gains a material advantage (as in the three situations described earlier), I think I WOULD want you to call it were I the defensive manager. Were I the offensive manager in the same situation, I wouldn't WANT you to call it, but you certainly wouldn't hear a peep out of me if you did.

JM

Oh, good. So I only need to take my focus off my job when someone thinks that another call is obvious or blatant. Now we have a rule with attempted enforcement, sometimes. Who decides what is obvious or batant? So what happens when a coach thinks it's obvious or blatant and I don't?

I can see it now. Batter squares to bunt and, in the opinion of a coach, is blatantly out of the box. He, checks his swing.

PU: "Did he go?" BU: "Beats the F*@# out of me, but I think his foot was out of the box."


Just the fact that the other side of this issue has to try so hard to come up with a situation to support their position should tell you something.

[UmpJM]

Originally Posted by PWL

Why do you call the batter out on a check swing? He needs to make contact to have an illegally batted ball.

PWL,

I don't believe Garth did (call the batter out).

I do believe you missed his point.

JM

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by CoachJM

Garth,

If it's obvious/blatant and a situation where the offense gains a material advantage (as in the three situations described earlier), I think I WOULD want you to call it were I the defensive manager. Were I the offensive manager in the same situation, I wouldn't WANT you to call it, but you certainly wouldn't hear a peep out of me if you did.

JM

And as PU, UIC, and chief trainer for my area, this is the LAST thing I want my BU's to try to be paying attention to.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by PWL

Why do you call the batter out on a check swing?

I don't think I've heard this one before. Okay, I give up, why DO you call the batter out on a check swing?

[NFump]

Because it was two strikes and "Yes, he did!"

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Tim C

Steve:

I don't know how to make it this any more clear.

If I am tracking a pitch correctly there is no way I am looking down at the plate area to see where a foot is at the precise time the ball is contacted.

I cannot do those two things at the same instant.

THEREFORE, as a matter of fact:

I have never looked down to see the placement of a batter's foot (feet) when bunting.

I do not have enough information to make a call I have never seen.

Regards,

I'm sorry. I don't understand. The batter squares around before the pitcher is finished winding up, he hasn't released the ball, and the batter has his foot all over the plate, way outside the box, and you don't see it? Or is it that you just don't choose to see it?

My strike zone's east and west borders are determined by their approximate location in relation to the outer edges of the 17 inch whitened 5-sided slab of rubber known as home plate. Part of my vision sees this plate on every pitch, and if there is a person standing on it, I'm going to see it.

Garth, this is not a "hypothetical question." This actually happens once in a blue moon. I wanted an answer to the question, "If you did see it, would you call it?" I didn't want an answer to "If you didn't see it?"

[mcrowder]

Steve, who cares where his feet are BEFORE he hits the ball - it's irrelevant. All that matters is where his feet are WHEN he hits the ball, and at that point you're tracking the pitch, not the feet.

You are missing the point on Tim too. You ask him to answer an impossible hypothetical, since he WILL NOT SEE IT - he's not looking down. Neither am I. Might as well ask us what we would call if we were standing at third base (as PU) when the pitch came in. It's an unanswerable hypothetical because it will never happen. It will happen as often as your hypothetical will though. Never.

If you're asking to probe for a hypothetical that he or I might conceive of calling this on, I can think of one... but it's TWP. Say your batter steps so far out in front that I actually lose sight of the pitch because the batter is actually in the way, and then he hits it, in front of his body. I suppose in that absurd case, I would have no pitch to track, and hearing the ball hit bat when he's standing ACROSS my plate, I suppose I would look down and see his foot on the ground and out of the box. However, it should be noted that if he merely lifts his foot at the right moment, even if standing across the plate, he's not out.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

Steve, who cares where his feet are BEFORE he hits the ball - it's irrelevant. All that matters is where his feet are WHEN he hits the ball, and at that point you're tracking the pitch, not the feet.

You are missing the point on Tim too. You ask him to answer an impossible hypothetical, since he WILL NOT SEE IT - he's not looking down. Neither am I. Might as well ask us what we would call if we were standing at third base (as PU) when the pitch came in. It's an unanswerable hypothetical because it will never happen. It will happen as often as your hypothetical will though. Never.

If you're asking to probe for a hypothetical that he or I might conceive of calling this on, I can think of one... but it's TWP. Say your batter steps so far out in front that I actually lose sight of the pitch because the batter is actually in the way, and then he hits it, in front of his body. I suppose in that absurd case, I would have no pitch to track, and hearing the ball hit bat when he's standing ACROSS my plate, I suppose I would look down and see his foot on the ground and out of the box. However, it should be noted that if he merely lifts his foot at the right moment, even if standing across the plate, he's not out.

It is relevant if he does not move his foot and contacts the ball. It may seem Third World, but it has happened, and in a HS game, too, not kiddie ball. Standing on home plate, way outside the box, and bunted the ball. I called him out, and got no flack about the call whatsoever.