Rule 10- Official Scorer and putout

[eagle_12]

Just lazily reading the rule book this afternoon and was reading Rule 10. I know we, as umps, don't worry about scoring the game and what not but I saw a interesting thing and was seeing about everyone elses input.

Rule 10.09 B: The officials scorer shall credit an automatic putout to the catcher when a:
(1) batter is called out on strikes.



My questions:
1.Is that called out, like caught looking, or both instances looking and swinging

2. Why does the catcher get credited with the put out. The definition of a put out is an action by a fielder which causes the out of an offensive player. The pitcher threw the ball, his pitch caused the batter to strike at the ball , or have the umpire to judge it to be a strike,

OR,

does the catcher recieve the credit due to the fact that he caught the ball and during the "point whatever extremly small amount of time" from when the ball crosses the plate to the point he catches it, the batter is sorta in limbo, and is not officially out/retired until the catcher successfully secures the ball.

Just wondering, Thanks

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by eagle_12

Just lazily reading the rule book this afternoon and was reading Rule 10. I know we, as umps, don't worry about scoring the game and what not but I saw a interesting thing and was seeing about everyone elses input.

Rule 10.09 B: The officials scorer shall credit an automatic putout to the catcher when a:
(1) batter is called out on strikes.



My questions:
1.Is that called out, like caught looking, or both instances looking and swinging

2. Why does the catcher get credited with the put out. The definition of a put out is an action by a fielder which causes the out of an offensive player. The pitcher threw the ball, his pitch caused the batter to strike at the ball , or have the umpire to judge it to be a strike,

OR,

does the catcher recieve the credit due to the fact that he caught the ball and during the "point whatever extremly small amount of time" from when the ball crosses the plate to the point he catches it, the batter is sorta in limbo, and is not officially out/retired until the catcher successfully secures the ball.

Just wondering, Thanks

He only gets credited with the putout if strike 3 retires the batter. If the strikeout requires a throw or tag to retire the batter, then the position that causes the batter to be out gets the putout. This is what is meant by "called out" on strikes. When it's an uncaught 3rd with less than two outs with first base unoccupied or with 2 outs, the batter is not automatically out on strike 3, so the catcher is not automatically credited with something he didn't cause to happen.

This is a major rewrite to the rules, as the catcher was not previously credited with putouts on strikeouts. Now the catcher is credited with the putout, and the pitcher is credited with the strikeout, but not the putout.

[TussAgee11]

I'll play nice...

Theoretically speaking...

F2 gets a putout because it was his action that created the out, not the pitch being a strike.

Suppose F2 drops the ball, and BR advances safely. According to your suggestion, F1 should still get a putout because he struck the batter out. Remember: a strike out is NOT an out until catcher catches the ball, or a runner is forced out on a D3K.

And, what difference does it make if he swings or not? A strike is a strike... don't matter how you get it.

Now, I'll return to rules 1-9.

[Rich Ives]

This is a major rewrite to the rules, as the catcher was not previously credited with putouts on strikeouts. Now the catcher is credited with the putout, and the pitcher is credited with the strikeout, but not the putout.


Huh?

The catcher has gotten the putout for decades, if not forever.

e.g.

Walter Johnson

3508 K's
292 Putouts.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

This is a major rewrite to the rules, as the catcher was not previously credited with putouts on strikeouts. Now the catcher is credited with the putout, and the pitcher is credited with the strikeout, but not the putout.


Huh?

The catcher has gotten the putout for decades, if not forever.

e.g.

Walter Johnson

3508 K's
292 Putouts.

Huh?

The last I'd heard, the Big Train was a pitcher, not a catcher. Walter Johnson covered first base on balls to the right side, and caught line drives and popups too. Hence the putouts. His strikeouts were also considered putouts, although not credited as such.

By rule, the catcher was not credited with a separate putout. All of Johnson's strikeouts counted as putouts, in addition to the 292 that came from other plays. Strikeouts were credited to the pitcher only in rule 10.17. Now the rule is 10.15, after the rules change.

The rule now known as 10.09 (b) used to not exist. Rule 10.10 used to be the section that addressed putouts. 10.10 (a) (1 through 7) were the only putouts automatically assigned to the catcher, and the batter being called out on strikes was not one of them. Now, under the newer rule changes, the catcher is credited with a putout.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Huh?

The last I'd heard, the Big Train was a pitcher, not a catcher. Walter Johnson covered first base on balls to the right side, and caught line drives and popups too. Hence the putouts. His strikeouts were also considered putouts, although not credited as such.

By rule, the catcher was not credited with a separate putout. All of Johnson's strikeouts counted as putouts, in addition to the 292 that came from other plays. Strikeouts were credited to the pitcher only in rule 10.17. Now the rule is 10.15, after the rules change.

The rule now known as 10.09 (b) used to not exist. Rule 10.10 used to be the section that addressed putouts. 10.10 (a) (1 through 7) were the only putouts automatically assigned to the catcher, and the batter being called out on strikes was not one of them. Now, under the newer rule changes, the catcher is credited with a putout.

So when did the rule change?

I mentioned Johnson because the K's greatly exceeded putouts. How could that be if K's counted as putouts?

As for catchers:

Bill Dickey had 7,965 putouts in his career.
Gabby Harntet 7,007 as a catcher.
Yogi - 8,738 as a catcher.
Ernie Lombardi - 5,694.
Al Lopez - 6,644

How would a catcher get that many without having the K's count?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

So when did the rule change?

I mentioned Johnson because the K's greatly exceeded putouts. How could that be if K's counted as putouts?

As for catchers:

Bill Dickey had 7,965 putouts in his career.
Gabby Harntet 7,007 as a catcher.
Yogi - 8,738 as a catcher.
Ernie Lombardi - 5,694.
Al Lopez - 6,644

How would a catcher get that many without having the K's count?

The rule changes must have been added when the playing rules were revised a couple years ago, like the same time the 20 second rule was changed to 12, or the rule about the batter being out on an uncaught 3rd strike when he leaves the dirt circle on his way to the bench.

The rule was probably rewritten just to clarify what was common scoring practice, but in the book I have (from the 1990's) catchers weren't automatically given the putout on strikeouts, at least according to the rules.

[SanDiegoSteve]

I just did a little research and discovered that I was correct. The "new" Rule 10 addresses the gap in the rules. It was another of those mistakes in the rules that has now been rectified.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I just did a little research and discovered that I was correct. The "new" Rule 10 addresses the gap in the rules. It was another of those mistakes in the rules that has now been rectified.

I'm thinking the "old" rule 10.17 was used to credit the catcher. 10.17 is really about crediting a strikeout, but it also involves the ball being caught by the catcher.

10.17 Yada Yada
(1) A batter is put out by a third strike caught by the catcher;

[canadaump6]

The new rules have been re-written to give runners credit for steals. In the past I believe if nobody contested R1 taking second with R3, they would call defensive indifference. Now R1 is given the steal due to knowing the catcher probably won't throw to 2nd.

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

The rule changes must have been added when the playing rules were revised a couple years ago, like the same time the 20 second rule was changed to 12, or the rule about the batter being out on an uncaught 3rd strike when he leaves the dirt circle on his way to the bench.

The rule was probably rewritten just to clarify what was common scoring practice, but in the book I have (from the 1990's) catchers weren't automatically given the putout on strikeouts, at least according to the rules.

You're reading something somewhere. Catchers have always gotten a putout on a caught third strike. Nine inning and losing team is home, the box score should account for a total of 54 putouts. No more or no less. A KO can go from a catcher getting an assist and first baseman will get a putout. As least that is the way I remember the way it was scored from years ago.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

You're reading something somewhere. Catchers have always gotten a putout on a caught third strike. Nine inning and losing team is home, the box score should account for a total of 54 putouts. No more or no less. A KO can go from 1-2-3 on a dropped third strike. Pitcher and catcher get an assist and first baseman will get a putout. As least that is the way I remember the way it was scored from years ago.

Get a pre-2006 rule book and check out the wording, which has been now changed in the new books. Read 10.10 (a) (1 through 7) and see that it doesn't mention strikeouts for catcher's putouts. Like I said, there was a gap in the rules, but now it has been addressed.

[yawetag]

Isn't it the other way around? The "defensive indifference" was added:

10.07(g): The official scorer shall not score a stolen base when a runner advances solely because of the defensive team’s indifference to the runner’s advance. The official scorer shall score such a play as a fielder’s choice.

This is the sole reason no one will ever break Rickey Henderson's record of SB.

Originally Posted by canadaump6

The new rules have been re-written to give runners credit for steals. In the past I believe if nobody contested R1 taking second with R3, they would call defensive indifference. Now R1 is given the steal due to knowing the catcher probably won't throw to 2nd.

[LMan]

Originally Posted by TussAgee11

And, what difference does it make if he swings or not? A strike is a strike... don't matter how you get it.

Now, I'll return to rules 1-9.

This is why you are a h8tr and will never fit in around here.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by yawetag

This is the sole reason no one will ever break Rickey Henderson's record of SB.

Gateway,

I would venture to say that this is one reason no one will ever break Rickey Henderson's SB record. Another reason being, he was the best base stealer ever. Not Coleman, not Cobb, not Brock, not Raines, not Wills...Rickey Henderson.

To quote Rickey when asked how he was so successful at stealing bases, "Rickey gets on."