Ball Four, in the dirt

[Kevin Finnerty]

Just for the record:

When a ball is scuffed, nicked, cut, soiled or discolored, it is tossed aside, and in the case of a discolored one that can be cleaned off, is actually re-introduced into the rotation and used again later in the game. So about a quarter to a third of the time, when you merely see one get soiled and tossed to the dugout, it is rubbed off and put back in the bucket of gamers for later use in that game.

Also, when a guy hits a screamer right on the screws, it puts a soft spot on the ball and it's discarded and put in a bucket for warm-ups, B.P. and other such things (like awarding to fans).

When Mike Piazza hit the scene, about halfway through his rookie year, Brett Butler told me to watch how many times the umpire asks for the ball after Piazza hits one of his screamers. He said, "They throw them out when they get dented. I have never seen one player crush as many baseballs as this kid. Just watch them. Every time he really gets a hold of one, they throw it out. He hits the ball harder than any hitter I've ever seen."

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

That's an old baseball physics myth.

Robert K. Adair, Ph.D., in his excellent book, The Physics of Baseball, addresses many of these baseball myths - the "advantage" of the higher mound being one of them.

When the mound was lowered, the slope remained the same. In other words, the higher mounds were not any steeper than than the lower mounds.

The height of the pitcher's plate has been changed at times. If the slope in front is retained at 1 inch to 1 foot, the height is almost irrelevant to the pitcher-batter competition. A decrease (or increase) in height of 2 inches is then precisely equivalent to an increase (or decrease) in the height of the plate - and the strike zone - by 2 inches, and the effect is that of making the pitcher throw each pitch 2 inches higher (or lower). However, if the slope is changed and the pitcher's foot lands at a different height, the leverage of the pitcher will change, and that can affect the delivery.

It's all explained - just like the myth of the "rising" fastball.

On the other hand, the advantage of a scuffed baseball is real.

Oh-oooooo! The rising fastball has surfaced again!

[Kevin Finnerty]

My son's a pitcher. Now that he's in college, the scuffs, cuts and mud packed in a seam all work much better with the higher speeds and better arm action of an older player.

He lives on the sinker, cutter and change-up (a splitter). When a guy chops a ball in front of the plate, and my son gets to keep using the same ball, I watch him check it, and if he notices that there's mud or dirt packed in the seam, he throws nothing but two-seamers, and they drop like stones. If there's a tear on a ball, if he wants it to break left, he positions the tear on the right, and vice-versa.

He never tears, scuffs or packs a ball, but if the umpire fails to check it or discard it, he just uses it. (I've almost never seen him ask for a different ball.) I learned that where-to-hold-the-tear-or-scuff thing from Don McMahon, an ex-MLB fireballing reliever, who used to coach for the Dodgers.

[realistic]

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

My son's a pitcher. Now that he's in college, the scuffs, cuts and mud packed in a seam all work much better with the higher speeds and better arm action of an older player.

He lives on the sinker, cutter and change-up (a splitter). When a guy chops a ball in front of the plate, and my son gets to keep using the same ball, I watch him check it, and if he notices that there's mud or dirt packed in the seam, he throws nothing but two-seamers, and they drop like stones. If there's a tear on a ball, if he wants it to break left, he positions the tear on the right, and vice-versa.

He never tears, scuffs or packs a ball, but if the umpire fails to check it or discard it, he just uses it. (I've almost never seen him ask for a different ball.) I learned that where-to-hold-the-tear-or-scuff thing from Don McMahon, an ex-MLB fireballing reliever, who used to coach for the Dodgers.

So you are saying that your son is a cheater, nice! And please don't say that if the umpire doesn't catch it, then it's legal cause it's not.

Let him throw one with alot of action with a cut ball(even if he didn't do it) and if someone catches him, he should be ejected because he is cheating. I wouldn't be so proud of a cheating rat.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by realistic

So you are saying that your son is a cheater, nice! And please don't say that if the umpire doesn't catch it, then it's legal cause it's not.

Let him throw one with alot of action with a cut ball(even if he didn't do it) and if someone catches him, he should be ejected because he is cheating. I wouldn't be so proud of a cheating rat.

REALISTIC?!? That's a laugh.

You're judgmental, naive and exceptionally rude. You are far from realistic. You should be ashamed of what you just said about my son. (Cheating rat??) Perhaps you're shameless, also. We'll see.

No, it's not cheating. No, it's not doing anything or applying anything illegal to the baseball. It's about schools with limited budgets using baseballs that you or I wouldn't allow. The umpires don't throw them out because they aren't vigilant or don't have an unlimited supply. The kid uses what he's given and knows how to use it. It's effing gamesmanship and little more.

[nopachunts]

Originally Posted by realistic

So you are saying that your son is a cheater, nice!

Hold on big boy. Cheating is strong language. The pitcher is merely using what God has given him. Just because knowing what to do with what you have been given doesn't make you a cheater.

[Kevin Finnerty]

The safety and anonymity of the Internet is essential for certain types of people in order for them to come out and say what they say.

As much as I'd like to see this Realistic guy say those words to mine or my son's face, it would never happen. He's one of those needs-safety-and-anonymity guys.

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by eagle_12

This is MLB. That's the way they do it. Also it's a time saver in a sport that is trying to save time and make the experience more enjoyable.

If they changed there practices this is how it would go. Ball 4 in dirt. Catcher asks for a new ball. Ump says "I can't yet, ball's still live". Catcher waits for batter to disrobe (elbow armor, shin protector, batting gloves) and leave everything in a nice little pile at the plate and saunter down to first base. Catcher then returns the ball to pitcher. Ump calls time asks for the ball back. Catcher and Ump then dance a little to figure out the exchange of baseballs, catcher tosses his back, Ump tosses his to the dugout and misses, ball goes rolling down the railing. Then the pitcher rubs up the ball, walks around the mound a little, grabs some rosin, take a deep breath and then toes the rubber.

Current practice, Ball 4 in the dirt, quick exchange, ball back in pitchers hand before batter reaches first base, we're ready to play. No harm No foul.

I would think that if a MLB player/club tried to advance to second on a walk with or without a runner at 3rd, someones getting a Rawlings tattoo

I agree with your analysis completely!

If you recall, my primary criticism was that the ball-swapping occurs in the first place. Yeah, I guess if they're going to swap the balls out every time - I guess they have no choice. What I propose is that they do have a choice.

You're probably right, this is a technical concession they have to make to keep the game moving. If you're not willing to make that concession, then you have to decide whether you want to delay the game in order to keep the ball live, or simply play a ball that just touched the ground .

Ooooo, does the itsy bitsy baseball have an itsy bitsy wittle skwatch on it? Well, we better get a brand new one because that big bad pitcher can make it do somersaults and stop in mid-air if we don't.

Think how much faster it would be if the catcher simply threw the ball back to the pitcher.

Also, let's remember that the ball-swapping doesn't just occur on ball four in the dirt. It happens on all counts. For that reason, I would say that, in aggregate, ball-swapping slows the game down. How many times, in the course of a game, is there a ball-four-in-the-dirt compared to a ball in the dirt on any other count?

By the way, although it had great dramatic effect to hyperbolize a point, most players don't wear the armor you described and take off for first rather expeditiously.

Hell, I remember watching Pete Rose draw a walk and I was never completely convinced that guy was going to stop. But, then again, that was back "in the day" where players found a way to play with a little dirt on the ball.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

The safety and anonymity of the Internet is essential for certain types of people to come out and say what they say.

As much as I'd like to see this Realistic guy say those words to mine or my son's face, it would never happen. He's one of those needs-safety-and-anonymity guys.

Which is why you shouldn't concern yourself one bit with what he said. It was both classless and uncalled for, not to mention quite ignorant and self righteous.


Tim.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

I agree with your analysis completely!

If you recall, my primary criticism was that the ball-swapping occurs in the first place. Yeah, I guess if they're going to swap the balls out every time - I guess they have no choice. What I propose is that they do have a choice.

You're probably right, this is a technical concession they have to make to keep the game moving. If you're not willing to make that concession, then you have to decide whether you want to delay the game in order to keep the ball live, or simply play a ball that just touched the ground .

Ooooo, does the itsy bitsy baseball have an itsy bitsy wittle skwatch on it? Well, we better getter a brand new one because that big bad pitcher can make it do somersaults and stop in mid-air if we don't.

Think how much faster it would be if the catcher simply threw the ball back to the pitcher.

Also, let's remember that the ball-swapping doesn't just occur on ball four in the dirt. It happens on all counts. For that reason, I would say that, in aggregate, ball-swapping slows the game down. How many times, in the course of a game, is there a ball-four-in-the-dirt compared to a ball in the dirt on any other count?

By the way, although it had great dramatic effect to hyperbolize a point, most players don't wear the armor you described and talk off for first rather expeditiously.

Hell, I remember watching Pete Rose draw a walk and I was never completely convinced that guy was going to stop. But, then again, that was back "in the day" where players found a way to play with a little dirt on the ball.

Dave,

Unless you're having to pay for the baseballs, spend the time rubbing them up, or having to change them out everytime they hit the dirt, it's getting hard to understand why you're getting so worked up about it. If it bothers you this much you have a choice to not have to ever see it happen again.


Tim.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by realistic

So you are saying that your son is a cheater, nice! And please don't say that if the umpire doesn't catch it, then it's legal cause it's not.

Let him throw one with alot of action with a cut ball(even if he didn't do it) and if someone catches him, he should be ejected because he is cheating. I wouldn't be so proud of a cheating rat.

Manipulating a scuffed or muddy baseball is not prohibited by the rules, so I don't see how that is cheating. Pretty gutless comment, IMO.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

Which is why you shouldn't concern yourself one bit with what he said. It was both classless and uncalled for, not to mention quite ignorant and self righteous.


Tim.

Tip of the creased, black cap to you, sir. Thank you.

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Manipulating a scuffed or muddy baseball is not prohibited by the rules, so I don't see how that is cheating. Pretty gutless comment, IMO.

And you as well, sir.

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

Dave,

Unless you're having to pay for the baseballs, spend the time rubbing them up, or having to change them out everytime they hit the dirt, it's getting hard to understand why you're getting so worked up about it. If it bothers you this much you have a choice to not have to ever see it happen again.
Tim.

I think you're overestimating how "worked up" I am about it.

But thanks for your concern ... and your advice.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

I think you're overestimating how "worked up" I am about it.

But thanks for your concern ... and your advice.

He wasn't overestimating how worked up I was.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

Think how much faster it would be if the catcher simply threw the ball back to the pitcher.

Since either action is completed before BR reaches first, and since no furhter action happens until after that, the savings would be negligible.