Automatic Strike/Penalty Strike NFHS

[Blue37]

At our local meeting yesterday, the actions of the batter were discussed. One area of disagreement arose. The situation presented was "The batter requests time and steps out of the box with one foot. The umpire does not grant time and the pitcher delivers a legal pitch which is not in the strike zone." Most of the group felt the pitch was a ball since it was not in the strike zone. Some of us felt otherwise, based on 6-2-4d-1. We felt it should be an automatic strike, regardless of location.

My interpretation of that section is summarized as follows: (I could not figure out how to display this as a table.)
Batter’s Action - Pitcher’s Action - Result
1. Steps out with one foot - Stops - Do-Over
2. Steps out with both feet - Stops - Penalty strike for leaving box with both feet.
3. Holds up hand, stays in box - Stops - Do-Over
4. Steps out with one foot - Delivers legal pitch - Automatic strike regardless of location.
5. Steps out with both feet - Delivers legal pitch - Automatic strike regardless of location and penalty strike for leaving box with both feet.
6. Holds up hand, stays in box - Delivers legal pitch - Automatic strike regardless of location.

Am I misreading the rule?

[blewthatone]

This is just me but I would have 1,2,3 as do-overs. I would go with 4 and 5. Number 6, I would call the pitch as it was. Either a ball or strike as the batter did not step out and it was a legal pitch. Not saying it is right but it just what I would do.

[Justme]

Originally Posted by Blue37

At our local meeting yesterday, the actions of the batter were discussed. One area of disagreement arose. The situation presented was "The batter requests time and steps out of the box with one foot. The umpire does not grant time and the pitcher delivers a legal pitch which is not in the strike zone." Most of the group felt the pitch was a ball since it was not in the strike zone. Some of us felt otherwise, based on 6-2-4d-1. We felt it should be an automatic strike, regardless of location.

My interpretation of that section is summarized as follows: (I could not figure out how to display this as a table.)
Batter’s Action - Pitcher’s Action - Result
1. Steps out with one foot - Stops - Do-Over
2. Steps out with both feet - Stops - Penalty strike for leaving box with both feet.
3. Holds up hand, stays in box - Stops - Do-Over
4. Steps out with one foot - Delivers legal pitch - Automatic strike regardless of location.
5. Steps out with both feet - Delivers legal pitch - Automatic strike regardless of location and penalty strike for leaving box with both feet.
6. Holds up hand, stays in box - Delivers legal pitch - Automatic strike regardless of location.

Am I misreading the rule?

Here's the rule -- notice only 3 examples given

If the pitcher, with a runner on base, stops or hesitates in his delivery because the batter steps out of the box:
(a) With one foot = there is no penalty to either the batter or the pitcher. The umpire shall call “time” and begin play anew. If the pitcher legally delivers the ball, it shall be called a strike and the ball remains alive.
(b) With both feet = a strike shall be called on the batter for violation of 7-3-1 (delaying the game). If the pitcher legally delivers the ball, it shall be called a strike and the ball remains alive. Thus, two strikes are called on the batter.
(c) Holds up his hand to request “Time”, it shall not be a balk. = there is no penalty to either the batter or the pitcher. The umpire shall call “time” and begin play anew. If the pitcher legally delivers the ball, it shall be called a strike and the ball remains alive.

If the umpire judges the batter’s action to be a deliberate attempt to create a balk, he will penalize according to 3-3-1o.

You can use these results to answer all of your questions.

[Old Time Ump]

Mr. Justme,
I think you should rethink (B).

[BretMan]

Nothing to rethink.

That is exactly as the rule appears in the FED book.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Old Time Ump

Mr. Justme,
I think you should rethink (B).

Why should Justme rethink (B)? That is exactly what the rule says to do. Check Rule 6-2-4d NOTE.

[Don Mueller]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Why should Justme rethink (B)? That is exactly what the rule says to do. Check Rule 6-2-4d NOTE.

Because Just me said:
"You can use these results to answer all of your questions."

But his interp does not cover all situations.

If B is deemed an intentional act to cause a balk, then 3-3-1o is to be enforced. He accidentally left that out.

[Justme]

Originally Posted by Don Mueller

Because Just me said:
"You can use these results to answer all of your questions."

But his interp does not cover all situations.

If B is deemed an intentional act to cause a balk, then 3-3-1o is to be enforced. He accidentally left that out.

Re-read my post (I included 3-3-1o), re-read the rule book. The rule book does cover the situations in the original post.

3-3-1o is not just applicable to (b). Anytime the umpire judges that the batter's act was intentional to cause a balk he can penalize according to 3-3-1o.

[Don Mueller]

Originally Posted by Justme

Re-read my post (I included 3-3-1o), re-read the rule book. The rule book does cover the situations in the original post.

3-3-1o is not just applicable to (b). Anytime the umpire judges that the batter's act was intentional to cause a balk he can penalize according to 3-3-1o.

sorry Just

I just didn't read far enough down your post.

Just like calling a game. When you get in a hurry you look bad and make mistakes.

[Old Time Ump]

I apologize. My comment about 'Rethinking point B' was prompted by more than 40 years of organized baseball. I forget that we are dealing here with other levels. The difficulty in applying B as expressed is that it is often not a black/white situation. One example, the pitcher is in his stretch looking toward second. When he comes around he sees tha batter has stepped out of the box and the catcher and PU are in their normal positions. He is annoyed and fires the pitch at the batter's left temple. (Happened in a game between Bayamon and Ponce). The PU was saved from a decision because the riot ended the contest. In the locker room he said he was going to call the pitch 'legal' and a strike because of 'delay of game'; and then warn the manager and the pitcher. Is that what would happen in High School and college, assuming our lads are too sophisticated to take up arms.

[Old Time Ump]

Further to the above: If the penalty strike is the second strike on the batter and the legal pitch, the third strike, gets away from the catcher and rolls to the backstop can the batter proceed to first? And if he makes it and, say, another run scores, doesn't the offending team(player) wind up with an advantage under application of 'B'?

[Justme]

Originally Posted by Old Time Ump

Further to the above: If the penalty strike is the second strike on the batter and the legal pitch, the third strike, gets away from the catcher and rolls to the backstop can the batter proceed to first? And if he makes it and, say, another run scores, doesn't the offending team(player) wind up with an advantage under application of 'B'?

3-3-1o penalty: The umpire shall eject the offender from the ball game.

Where is the advantage to the offending player?

[Blue37]

Originally Posted by Old Time Ump

Further to the above: If the penalty strike is the second strike on the batter and the legal pitch, the third strike, gets away from the catcher and rolls to the backstop can the batter proceed to first? And if he makes it and, say, another run scores, doesn't the offending team(player) wind up with an advantage under application of 'B'?

Great question!

Remember we are talking NFHS in this thread.

Yes, the run scores and the batter is at 1st. But the offending team has not benefited from the application of "B", they have benefited from the wild pitch/passed ball.

Your question has made me wonder about the mechanics in this situation. If the batter already has one strike, and he steps out with both feet and the pitch is a wild pitch/passed ball, what are the proper mechanics? It seems the umpire needs to loudly announce both strikes so the players can react properly. If there is no one on base, the batter and the catcher are probably both standing there and the on-deck batter is retrieving the wild pitch. If there is a runner on base, the catcher is going after the ball, but the batter is most likely just standing there. Without an immediate loud announcement, similar to the checked swing on strike three, someone is at a disadvantage

[Blue37]

Originally Posted by Justme

3-3-1o penalty: The umpire shall eject the offender from the ball game.

Where is the advantage to the offending player?

Remember that the penalty in 3-3-1o only applies if the umpire adjudges the batter was attempting to cause a balk.

[LMan]

Originally Posted by Blue37

Great question!

Remember we are talking NFHS in this thread.

Yes, the run scores and the batter is at 1st. But the offending team has not benefited from the application of "B", they have benefited from the wild pitch/passed ball.

Your question has made me wonder about the mechanics in this situation. If the batter already has one strike, and he steps out with both feet and the pitch is a wild pitch/passed ball, what are the proper mechanics? It seems the umpire needs to loudly announce both strikes so the players can react properly. If there is no one on base, the batter and the catcher are probably both standing there and the on-deck batter is retrieving the wild pitch. If there is a runner on base, the catcher is going after the ball, but the batter is most likely just standing there. Without an immediate loud announcement, similar to the checked swing on strike three, someone is at a disadvantage

I agree, the umpire would need to be loud and emphatic here. But this is veering close to a TWP....

OTU: what's the issue with "B?" Sure the batter can advance....but it would be a savvy batter who interpreted that situation correctly. They would probably be too busy whining about the third-strike call to run down the line.

a PB under any circumstances is an adv to the offense, a detriment to the defense...catcher shoulda dun bettah! That has nothing to do with the penalty strike, they are separate events.