Ball Four, in the dirt

[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

[realistic]

Here is a little inside info, not all umpires raise their hands when they call time to take a ball out of play. Not every ball tossed out by a PU is discarded. Most are rubbed back up by the bat boy and put back into the gameball bag.

And one more thing, when a question ask's how a MLB guy does something, who gives a crap how it's done in anything else???

[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."

[Tim C]

"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."

Pretentious, gutless and incorrect. All in one post.

Hip, hip . . . well done.

Ties for the dumbest post on the internet.

Never have worked a game, huh?

[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 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.

[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.

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

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

That's true. I'm speaking, in general - not just ball four in the dirt.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

That's true. I'm speaking, in general - not just ball four in the dirt.

I don't think the amount of time it takes to exchange baseballs with the catcher for an entire game adds up to more than a minute or two, so even in general it's a weak argument to use time savings as a benefit for not changing baseballs.

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I don't think the amount of time it takes to exchange baseballs with the catcher for an entire game adds up to more than a minute or two, so even in general it's a weak argument to use time savings as a benefit for not changing baseballs.

That's true.

This thread took a turn I hadn't intended. I was simply pointing out how spring-loaded they are to change baseballs at the MLB level and that it has become so routine that there does not seem to be any concern that this swapping occurs when the ball should remain live. Those reasons have been discussed and they make sense. This obsession with pristine baseballs has not always existed, even during an era when money was certainly not the issue.

And then, when a pitcher casually gets rid of a ball that has touched the ground he is promptly penalized. Was the runner advancing? Why not take the same ho-hum attitude with that occurrence?

Really just an observation more than a criticism.

[RPatrino]

Realistic, do you even umpire?