Swinging Strike + Hit Batter + Dropped 3rd Strike

[johnnyg08]

there's quite a thorough "hands part of the bat thread" that discusses this issue...

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Matt

I agree, but I'm thinking of the guys that might take it (due to the second clause in the sentence) to mean "A batter-runner cannot be awarded first on an uncaught third strike."

They would be correct to interpret it that way. Again, in your scenarios, the award is due to the ball going out of play, not the D3K. The batter became a runner because of the D3K, but the award was because of the ball entering DBT.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by mbyron

They would be correct to interpret it that way. Again, in your scenarios, the award is due to the ball going out of play, not the D3K. The batter became a runner because of the D3K, but the award was because of the ball entering DBT.

As I have already stated, I know that. However, the statement lends itself to the inference that an uncaught third strike precludes awards, which is not true.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Matt

As I have already stated, I know that. However, the statement lends itself to the inference that an uncaught third strike precludes awards, which is not true.

That statement simply says that one is not awarded first base on an uncaught third strike, which is completely true. The statedoes not lend itself to any inference. To come to one requires a lot of work and the desire to do so.


To claim an inference would be like saying the a batter could be out on strike two because the rule only says he is out on strike three; it doesn't say he can't be out on strike two. Dumb.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

That statement simply says that one is not awarded first base on an uncaught third strike, which is completely true. The statedoes not lend itself to any inference. To come to one requires a lot of work and the desire to do so.

Not really.