Illegally batted ball... am I the only one...
 

who makes this call? It's simple... in all places except little league, the batter is out if he makes contact with the ball while his foot is either on home plate or completely out of the batter's box. Yet, NOBODY seems to know this, and I can only recall one person besides me who's called it. (By the way, in little league, if the kid's foot is on the plate but a portion of his foot is still in the box, it's legal.)

I had a college game where the batter squared around with his foot touching the black (I know the black isn't part of the plate) but his foot isn't 6" wide unless he's sasquatch. So I made the call, and the coach went berzerk, and my evaluator said I might have been over-umpiring; he said he'd probably have let that one go. Yesterday, I'm doing a men's league game, and the guy chases an outside pitch so that almost his entire foot is in front of the plate (maybe 1" of heel was still toward the batter's box) and I made the call. The coach came out, told me he had NEVER had that called against him, etc... etc... etc...

Just curious... am I the only guy unfortunate enough to have it happen in his games, or are most umpires just not taking a glance at the feet?

Lee

There was a heated discussion on this several months ago, and the consensus seemed to be that no one called it, with the most common reason being that plate umpires were too busy watching other things back there that they couldn't really see an illegally batted ball. Some expressed surprise when I stated that I have seen it and have called it. I don't recall if I ever explained that the ONLY time I've ever called this is during a bunt attempt, when it's far easier to call it.

I'm not talking about the simple squaring around to bunt. I've called it when the batter squares to bunt and does one of those running bunts where he ends up contacting the ball while he's halfway into the infield. If a plate umpire cannot see and call that, then there's something wrong.

Out of 150-180 games per year, I get this probably once, MAYBE twice, and each time it generates a discussion from the head coach/manager. He asks, I answer, and the game continues. I probably should note that I give the benefit of the doubt to the batter, and if the batter's box lines aren't visible, it really has to be obvious for me to call it.

Agreed... it's infrequent...
 

Maybe it's because I also do softball and the slap hitters do it far more, but I get the situation about once every couple of months. It's usually easy, with the foot being on the plate. I just don't understand why we're not looking for it when the guy (or gal) squares, starts right at the edge of the box or makes a really awkward swing.

Lee

I call this probably two or three times a year and as UMP25 says usually when the batter is trying to bunt.

It makes for an interesting discussion sometimes when the batter is called out on a foul ball during an attempted bunt.

The conversation usually goes something like:

Umpire: "Batter out for contacting ball while out of the batter's box!"

Coach: "But that was only strike one??"

Umpire: "Doesn't matter, he was outside the batter's box when he hit the ball. He's out."

Coach: "I've never heard of that rule."

Umpire: "Check the rule book. We can talk after the game if you like but not during the game."

The game then continues and either the coach comes out during the game and says I'm right or I never hear from them again about it.

An answer and then some
 

To answer your question, I can't recall making this call, but if I did, it was in a Little League game:).

I don't think that this was your only mis-characterization of the rule. LL follows OBR in that the plate is not mentioned in Rule 6.06. I'm not an expert, but I believe that NCAA follows OBR as well, leaving FED as the oddball ruleset to mention home plate.

I don't know what '1" of heel was still toward the batter's box' means, but if it means that 1" of heel was over the line marking the box, my understanding is that rule 6.06 does not apply. One foot has to be on the ground entirely out of the box.

The previous thread is very interesting reading.

nobody knows this because it isn't a rule.

That's legal in any game played under OBR. It's not legal in games played under FED rules (and I think NCAA).

I'm only going to call this if it's pretty obvious since i'm watching the pitch as priority #1. If he is barely touching the black of the plate, i'm not going to call it. If he's totally in front of it as in your second example, i would call it (if i happen to see it).

6.06
A batter is out for illegal action when --
(a) He hits a ball with one or both feet on the ground entirely outside the batter’s box.

It's legal only under OBR. Under NCAA, touching the plate while contacting the ball is, like FED, a no-no.

thanks for the update. i know the rule. the original post stated that the batter was out when he was stepping on the plate, except in LL, which is wrong.

Note the lack of a mention of home plate in that rule. Thanks for proving Bobby's point.

Am I missing something or do you guys think home plate is actually inside the batter's box???

No, but they know that one can have a foot touching home plate and still be in the batter's box. (OBR)

If the batter's back foot is completely on the plate and you claim that "you're tracking the pitch" and not looking on the plate to see the foot. Perhaps you shouldn't be behind the plate. The batter's body is blocking most of the strike zone and you wouldn't notice?????

Hahahaha
 

"If the batter's back foot is completely on the plate and you claim that "you're tracking the pitch" and not looking on the plate to see the foot. Perhaps you shouldn't be behind the plate. The batter's body is blocking most of the strike zone and you wouldn't notice?????"

Just another reason I get "disappointed" with internet umpires.

I give up.

So, you can both see the ball hit the bat and the foot on the ground at the same time? Do your eyes operate independently? Mine don't.

I will admit calling this maybe twice in my career. Both on bunt attempts. One was in front of the plate, about 4 feet out, and the batter was stationary when he hit it - I was sure the feet (both feet in this case) were still on the ground when I saw him hit the ball - but in that case, he was about 6-7 feet from me, so I could see both ball, bat, and feet in my field of vision. The other was a bunt attempt on a pitch out where the batter chased it. He was quite literally in the other batters box, and while I was not absolutely positive which foot was on the ground, it was ugly and blatant enough that NOT calling it would have been unthinkable. There was no way BOTH feet were airborne when he hit it.

But, absent absurd or ridiculous cases like both of these, it is nearly impossible, if you are doing what you are supposed to, to both see ball strike bat and foot touching ground at the same time. If you are calling this on a semi-regular basis, you are probably guessing. And "once or twice a year" is WAY too often, unless you are working in the Ringling Brothers Baseball League.

I can assure you that I can have half of my size 14 shoe on home plate, and still have my heel in the batter's box. I don't think you're missing anything except your point.

Tibear -

We have had this debate on the previous thread. I tend to agree with you some, I don't notice it really until after the ball is contacted, normally on a bunt. I can normally look down immediately after contact to see where the foot was. Or, if he squares when the pitcher is just starting his motion, or in the set, then I always glance down at the feet quickly.

But again, other umpires on this board will tell you that I'm full of it on this topic and others, so don't trap yourself by pushing this point like I did.

Tuss

The 1 st OP didn't say completely on the plate, its said 'on the black'. In the 2d, I don't know exactly what "1" of heel was still toward (?) the batters box" means but if he meant part of his heel was still touching the line, he's legal.


LIke a lot of other disingenuous posters, you are changing the sitch to suit your argument. Typical.


I do like how Mr Cedar graciously brought us up to date on LL rules, though :D

If the batter's dumbass body is over the plate and blocks my view of the pitch, I'm gonna ring up a dead ball strike if the ball hits him, since he got hit in the strike zone.

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c3...5/Internet.gif

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c3.../Internet2.gif

Normally, when a ball is contacted, I follow the path of the ball. In my area,
when a batter squares to bunt, the catcher rocks up on the balls of his feet, preparing to try to field the ball. When that happens, I certainly am not looking at the batter's feet.
I would rather know if the ball remains fair, and follow the subsequent play,
than worry over the placement of a batter's foot. YMMV.

My mistake - I knew better. It was an editing mistake. I meant to put it after my comment about FED - not OBR. I'll blame it on the time change. My brain is still on Daylight Saving Time.

On average, I call it about twice a year. When I see it, it is never a difficult call, whole foot on the plate when contact is made, and almost always a bunt attempt and the foot is planted well before the ball arrives. When the coach comes out for explanation (almost always happens) I say "his foot was on the plate coach, it was an easy call", and they always turn around and go back to the bench.

Hehehe
 

"On average, I call it about twice a year . . ."

As Carl is known to say:

"Amazing"

Regards,

What's amazing about it? It's one of the easier plays to see clearly.

T -

Honestly, especially with lesser competitive ball, like rec leagues, it happens quite often.

LL i'd imagine it happens ALOT

Tuss

The thread had obviously changed to discuss rule 6.06 a which is what I was talking about.

Obviously, unless you are 100% certain that a batter's foot is COMPLETELY outside the batter's box you're not going to call this.

The only time I can really enforce this rule is when the batter is bunting and has turned before the pitcher's windup or just as he starts. I can see the batter blocking most of the strike zone and immediately take a quick glance down to check the foot. If he's completely on the plate, then if contact is made he's out. I can tell if he had shifted again to move his foot back but most times if his foot is on the plate when I first glance, he doesn't move it until he contacts the ball.

And if he did lift it 2 millimeters off the ground just before contact, tough for him he shouldn't have had his foot out of the box to begin with.

My two cents. Never had an arguement, maybe a quick question but never more then 5 seconds of dicussion.

Others can ignore what they want but I'll stick to enforcing the rulebook.

Translation - even if the player did legally hit the ball, I'm going to enforce my own unwritten rule and call him out because he has angered the Umpire God by his previous actions of having his foot on the ground out of the box (which I noticed BEFORE the ball hit the bat because I was not doing my job)
How can you blatantly tell us you are going to enforce your own set of right vs wrong, despite what the rulebook says, and then make this last statement in the same post.

I agree with Tee, who quoted Carl. Amazing.

whatever:rolleyes:

OK... my viewpoint, for what it's worth...
 

First, to clarify what people have been asking about what I mean by 1" toward the batter's box...

If a right handed batter's foot is 12" long, and 11" of his left foot is directly between the pitcher's mound and home plate, that only leaves 1" of his left heel between home plate and the batter's box, not the 6" needed for any part of his foot to be in the batter's box.

And regarding whether or not he lifted his foot prior to hitting the ball... if his foot is on the ground completely out of the batter's box... and he doesn't put it back in, then you can't say he's in the batter's box. Otherwise, he could run wherever, down the 3rd base line, 1st base line, to the mound, and so long as he jumped in the air, and it's legal?

Sorry... since 99% of ALL hitters plant their front foot prior to hitting a ball, seeing if their foot is completely out of the box is a relatively easy call... if there's an awkward swing, it's not hard to see a big enough picture to glance at the batter's foot... most times.

And I do thank those of you who helped me out with letting me know the OBR regarding this... I do almost exclusively FED, LL and a ton of softball (I know, it's the dark side of the force on this board.) In all those except LL, touching the plate is included in the rule.

Lee

Lee:
 

To steal from a previous poster:

whatever

Regards,

I don't have to say that he's in the box, or even see that he is. I will call a violation only if I see him hit the ball when one foot is not in the box. And in the vast, vast majority of cases, I will not see this.

You are inferring a violation, which is bad umpiring practice. Penalize only violations that you see, not what probably happened.

I have seen only one umpire that I admire call this, and that was a slap bunt by a LH batter who had both feet out of the box and was 5 feet toward the mound when he bunted an off-speed pitch that screwed up his (the batter's) timing. Granny could have called that one, which is why PU had to.

So I will not deny that I would call this, but none of the cases I've seen described in this (or the other) thread would merit the call from me, because I would not have seen it.

And those are the situations where I call this. Believe it or not, I actually had a right-handed batter attempt to bunt on a pitch that was WAY outside--in the other batter's box. He quite literally jumped across the plate and smacked the ball (foul) when he was in the other batter's box. After I banged him out, I had to give the head coach an "A" for creative thinking when, in response to my explaining that he wasn't in the batter's box when he contacted the ball, the guy said, "But he was in the batter's box when he hit the ball, Randy. It doesn't specify which box you know." :D

I like it!

Of course, the batter would still be out, just from (b) instead of (a). ;)

Whoa, it must be the off season. Where do we come up with these subjects?