Bunt

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I disagree with this statement. (Okay, to be clear, I don't disagree that Don does it; I disagree that he, or any umpire, should do it).

An umpire needn't "look hard" for an attempt. He just needs to watch the actions and judge accordingly.

I suppose "looking hard" at any call is an indecency? Or just this one. How about looking hard at all of them?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by fitump56

I suppose "looking hard" at any call is an indecency? Or just this one. How about looking hard at all of them?

An umpire should "look hard" AT all the calls, I agree.

He shouldn't look hard FOR any (desired) outcome

[Don Mueller]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

He shouldn't look hard FOR any (desired) outcome

You sure?

Have you ever had a batter that's been giving you grief, maybe needs an attitude adjustment and you look a little harder for strikes? Maybe give an extra ball or ball and a half on the outside. Isn't that looking for a desired outcome?
Let's be totally honest.
Kid's on the edge of being tossed, 2 strikes, pitch comes in a ball and a half outside your normal zone. Don't tell me your not ringing him up.
You, I and everyone else on the board is praying for him to either cross the line or a pitch anywhere close to ring him up.
That's looking for a desired outcome.
Expanding the strike zone is not a penalty for any rules infraction and when we do it we 'are making up our own rules' to paraphrase some who are accusing me of such.
We all draw our lines somewhere south of the rulebook and are all guilty of essentially the same thing. Let's not be hypocrites just because my line is drawn a little different than yours.

[PeteBooth]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by Don Mueller

You sure?

Have you ever had a batter that's been giving you grief, maybe needs an attitude adjustment and you look a little harder for strikes? Maybe give an extra ball or ball and a half on the outside. Isn't that looking for a desired outcome?
Let's be totally honest.

You are comparing Apples / Oranges

From the OP which IMO is lost in your analysis

In LL Rules If The Batter Is Holding The Bat Showing A Bunt As The Pitcher Has Thrown The Ball And Its A Pitch Away From The Strike Zone And The Batter Made No Attempt To Pull Away Or An Attempt At The Ball, Then It Is Not A Strike. Yes I Was Confused. Is This Correct?

Since you said Let's be totally honest For the most part you will only see the tactic mentioned in the OP in the young ages of LL.

You are not going to give some 8 - 10 yr. old kid an FYC call.

I will admit I have "sent messages" but it was in adult leagues who understood this and it was only done once in the early stages of the game. "Sending a message" is done as an altenative to tossing but is non applicable in dealing with this thread.

IMO, we need to stay "on track" with the OP who asked a SPECIFIC question which was answered properly by Garth, TEE, Rich Ives and Bob.

Personally (as if anybody cares) teaching players to simply hold the bat over home plate to distract F1 is doing a dis-service to that particular player and as he grows up will "pay for it". It is not teaching him anything but That is not what the rules states.

Heck if we are going to make up rules I wish there was one for coaching stupidity meaning we can call outs "on principle" but we can't if we are doing our job. We all like outs as they are our friends but we have to get those outs in accordance with the rules.

Pete Booth

[Don Mueller]

[QUOTE=PeteBooth]

Since you said Let's be totally honest For the most part you will only see the tactic mentioned in the OP in the young ages of LL.

You are not going to give some 8 - 10 yr. old kid an FYC call.

Pete,
I didn't mean to get off track, the sitch I proposed was only to show that at times we all look for a desired outcome and at times it affects our call.
If everyone is insightful enough to accept that premise there is no need to debate a specific situation.

Here it is in a nutshell:

We all take liberties with the strikezone so why is it so bad to take liberties with the bunt strike?
Isn't it hypocritical to ignore a strike in one situation and then call someone a troll for taking a strike in a different situation?

[Rcichon]

I mostly call 17u ball for Little League. There, I was taught that the kid has to offer. Meaning [for me] he has to attempt to track the ball with the bat in an attempt to hit it. Simply leaving it out over the plate is never offering for me. His intent is clear either way; he is either not trying to hit or by tracking the ball with the bat, he is trying to hit. I really don't care why he left the bat out over the plate.

Rats know this. I have not had any chirping when making this call either way. Not that I care what rats do in a game but I understand I get more chirping if I blow calls.

I'd wager three game payments that you get more chirping on this than I do.