Bunt question

[danvers]

Michael,

Thanks for providing a reference and for not adopting a condescending or patronizing tone. This is obviously something that I'm going to have to put some thought and study into. If the consensus goes against me--and I doubt that I'm going to find anything for PONY ball that will shut down on the LL reference--I'll change my call. If I'm going to change the call, though, I'd really like to have an explanation that would make me feel more comfortable with the ruling :-) Anyway, here's where I am according to the discussion....

If a batter strikes at a pitch, he's usually trying to intentionally meet that pitch. He declares his intent by the act of swinging. If he misses, we call the strike whether the pitch is in the strike zone or not. We know that he "went," and we call accordingly.

If a batter prepares to bunt a pitch, he's often trying to intentionally meet that pitch. He doesn't declare his intent by the act of swinging (otherwise, it wouldn't be a bunt), so we have no way of determining intent unless he makes contact. My approach, which has been to determine intent by the fact that the batter overtly gives up his declaration and "pulls back," is not valid. Subsequently, I have no physical cues by which to determine intent, and I'm left with calling only the zone or the foul--no matter how much my brain tells me that he "went."

~~Dan