why is this so confusing to so many umpires?

[UmpJM]

Steve,

I misunderstood your point. I could live with that.

In my games, when I can't tell if it hit the hand or the bat first, I "judge" that it hit the hand first.

JM

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

Steve,

I misunderstood your point. I could live with that.

In my games, when I can't tell if it hit the hand or the bat first, I "judge" that it hit the hand first.

JM

Yes, if I can't tell, then the default call is that it hit the hand. My example was if it clearly hit bat first.

[Dave Reed]

Steve, I'm going to quibble here. If the ball strikes the bat first, and then a finger, I think it is a batted ball which subsequently strikes the batter.

By common interpretation, a batted ball which strikes the batter, even if in the forward part of the box which is actually fair territory, it is a foul ball.

I can't support a call of fair when the ball strikes the batter. Either it is dead because it hit the batter first, or foul because it hit the batter second.

[mbyron]

Dave Reed is correct. All the required citations are listed at the beginning of this thread.

[TussAgee11]

What Dave said... this is no different than a batter hitting one of his foot.

Either way you're going to have a) a foul ball or b) a dead ball strike. Only time the difference will matter is with 2 strikes.

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I'm talking about a possible near-simultaneous hit of both ball and finger, with the bat being hit just prior to maybe nicking a finger.

It's like a near-simultaneous bang-bang play at first base. There ain't no ties!

You have to use your judgment to to decide which got hit first, then you can apply the proper rule.