Ball Four, in the dirt
 

First of all, when did it become common practice in MLB to get a new baseball every time a ball touches the ground? I find this an annoying ritual. No matter how slight, a new baseball comes into play. It just seems kind of silly to me.

Here is something that I noticed the other day while watching an MLB game - and it happened twice in the same game. Who knows how many times this has occurred without my notice?

Ball four is in the dirt but caught cleanly by the catcher. The batter trots off to first base as the catcher hands the ball to the PU who exchanges it for a new ball.

Huh?

The ball is live and in play! We have a baserunner!

What happens if the catcher's throw back to the pitcher is wild and the batter-runner tries to make a break for 2nd? Is it possible he can be thrown out by a different baseball than the one that initiated the play? Or - is the ball dead, precluding the batter-runner from attempting to advance to 2nd? Worse yet, what if the umpire's throw back to the pitcher is wild?

In a game earlier in the week, with runners on base, a pitcher decides he doesn't like the baseball and tosses the one in his hand toward the ballboy stationed near the dugout. The pitcher was about 20-feet from the mound at the time. The umpire calls him for a balk! (I assume the PU interpreted it as a delivery without being in contact with the rubber. He killed the ball - but I don't know why he did that.)

Something seems wrong to me with all this baseball exchanging.

Any opinions?

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

I don't think a balk was called, the pitcher thought time had been called and threw the ball in the dugout, and if I remember correctly the runner on 1b was awarded 3b.

I can't say when it became standard practice, but I suspect a major league pitcher worth his salt can do nasty things with a dirty baseball. Besides, they have 100 of them to use, why not use them all.

That makes more sense. I just saw it briefly on TV and I think the announcer said a "balk" had been called. He was probably wrong, though.

You just KNOW the ball cannot possibly be all scuffed up in most of the instances when they replace it.

All it takes is one small blemish, scuff or cut. Those dastardly pitchers don't need any more help, they will use any advantage they can get...

Yes, the announcer was wrong. It was an award for a fielder (F1 off the rubber) throwing the ball out of play.

As far as exchanging baseballs, this has been a practice for a long time. RPatrino hit the nail on the head when he said that anything on the ball can be an advantage to these pitchers. Also, we are used to working with filthy baseballs whereas MLB can afford to keep a nice clean ball in play.

Oh gosh, I can't believe the umpires are stopping the BR from trying for second on a walk...what are they thinking???:rolleyes:

Are you really asking these questions Memphis? The ball is dead when the umpire examines it. The ball isn't going to become live when the umpire throws a new ball to the pitcher.

They are supposed to start a game with 6 dozen rubbed up baseballs. So if they can toss them out for hitting the dirt and get by with 6 dozen then fine. I always assumed those are being put in a ball bag so PU can inspect late in the game if the 6 dozen is getting low.

they use a lot more than 6 dozen. i rubbed 7 in A ball. as far as checking the ball each time it hits the dirt goes...you have to. it's not dirt, it's clay; and it's hard. the balls not only get scuffed, they get cut. it doesn't happen every time it hits, but it happens enough that it has to be checked every time it does.

YGTBSM!

This has to at least tie, wouldn't you people say?:eek:

Not possible.

MLB is different from LL.

August 23, 1974, 5th inning

Everyone is relaxed at this point. It's not LL -- the chances of a baserunner (especially the BR) advancing here are less than .001%.

It's much the same as a coach requesting and being granted time to go out to the pitcher just after ball 4.

What I mean by "caught cleanly" is that it doesn't ricochet away. It just skips into the dirt and is caught. It's not a loose ball. Actually, even that is irrelevant. Even if the ball skips away from the catcher a few inches, I've seen they change baseballs before the batter is even halfway down the line.

I would think you would have to wait to change baseballs once the batter reaches 1st and is clearly making no attempt to advance. It's sort of analogous as to when a batter walks and the defensive manager wants to call time immediately to talk to his pitcher. He has to WAIT until the BR reaches first - then he can have time.

I understand - but most managers understand that they can't walk out onto the field before the runner reaches first - nor will time be called until he does.

Are you saying you immediately kill the ball the moment the manager indicates that he wants to walk out onto the field and talk to his pitcher based on the low probability that the runner will advance or that the catcher's throw-back will be wild?

Maybe in your games. I grant time immediately at the HS and college level or wherever kids can actually play.

This must be a great revelation, then. Does today's, modern field have some super-abrasive additive that did not exist a decade ago? Because I have been watching MLB all my life and I never recall the ball-switching mania like that which exists today.

Oh sure, if the ball is drilled into the ground - I understand that. But they swap it out for the most innocuous touch of the ground. Hell, I think they're swapping it out if only the catcher's glove touches the ground while catching the pitch. They swap it out if it might have touched the ground.

MLB seemed so focused on cutting down the length of the games. How 'bout not switching baseballs every time it just ticks the turf? I'd bet that would shave a few minutes off the game - especially when you factor in how the pitcher tends to rub up each new ball before the next delivery.

No you don't! Because you don't have over 100 baseballs to work with.

And, if you do swap balls every time it touches the ground (especially in a HS game) - I'll bet you continue using that ball 99% of the time. At worst, you slip it into the bag just to reemerge one foul ball later. Hell, half the time you don't have more than three at time to work with after about dozen foul balls into the woods.

Unless it's wet, hits the backstop, or is noticeably discolored or damaged - in a HS game - keep using it, for crissakes.

You call "time" every time the ball touches the ground?

Ohhhh - so that explains the greatness of Bob Gibson and Sandy Koufax. They had the advantage of scuffed baseballs. Because I know they didn't swap baseballs out like that in those days.

Naturally I was being facetious about the ball being live when the umpire throws it back. Geez - give me a little credit.

What if there was a runner on 3rd during the ball-in-the-dirt walk? Killing the ball takes away a seldom used, but viable, tactic of the runner continuing after the walk. That would probably never occur in a MLB game - but I've seen it numerous times in HS.

Apparently reading is a skill you haven't acquired. The man never said he changed balls every time the ball hit the dirt.

And, I believe he was commenting on calling time on a base on balls.

Even then, calling time every time the ball touches the ground in a HS game is silly, in my opinion.

Just what is it you expect to see? A little scuff? A grass stain? Now what - throw the ball out? Pfft!

The coaches around here would be very pissed about that - that I do know.

I can hear it now:

Coach: "Blue, what's wrong with this ball?"

Ump: "It has a small scuff mark on it, coach."

Coach: "Yeah, well, we're gonna play with it anyway unless you want to donate $200 to our booster club."

I mean I call time as soon as the defensive coach asks for time. I don't do the "wait until the batter gets to fir.....OK, TIME" nonsense.

There's one school here where I get the minimum 3 balls to start a game. Last year in about the 3rd inning, I noticed a nice cut on the ball and told the home team to throw that one out. I got the whole "what kind of budget do you think I have" routine...

In high school baseball, I pretty much keep all of the baseballs in play even if they're bad...like you said, typically I only get three...and it's like pulling teeth to get more baseballs, so unless they're really bad or a player complains about a baseball, then I swap it out...but for the sake of keeping the game moving, I play with what they give me.

Perhaps a higher mound explains it a heck of alot better.
---------------------

On a side note, some basic math. 12 dozen balls X $120 per dozen X 162 games a year X (32 teams / 2) = about 3.7 million a year for balls based on open market price.

MLB just contracts Rawlings, correct? It's not up to each team to buy balls for the year, is it?

At the high school level there aren't that many pitchers who know what to do with a doctored ball. And if they do, I like it, and I like it a lot!

pretty much!

Again...reading is apparently not your strong suit. Why do you make this stuff up....are you a coach? This is not what the man is saying.

And regards your little league scenario...I have NEVER had a high school coach or college skipper question why I threw a ball out of play.

if you want to go the sarcasm route with me, i'm game, sir. but, before we delve into that, are you fully prepared to contend that TODAY'S game is the same as the game was a DECADE ago? times change. the game changes. they don't want scuffed balls now, and, with people paying a ridiculous sum of money to watch, they have the loot to be able to provide a "perfect" ball for just about every pitch. it is what it is.

Bingo. I'm just a little disappointed that it took you till post 29 to divine that. :D

I think that we pretty much established the real answer early on in this thread:

This is MLB and not LL!

In MLB they can, and do (by accepted practice).

Yes, in all the games I do.

To be clear, "immediately" means that I take about a second to see if BR is running hard to first on the walk, or is just strolling down there. 99.5% of the time it's the latter, and I grant time before BR reaches first.

Let's try another analogy:

Runners are supposed to retouch their bases after a foul, and the umpire isn't supposed to put the ball in play until they do. Yet, almost all of us put the ball in play when both teams indicate (by their actions) that they are ready for play to resume -- the runner is "close enough" to the base so that neither team gains an advantage.

It's the same with the exchange of the ball (in MLB) and the granting of time -- both teams have indicated that they are prepared for play to stop, even though the literal rule does not allow play to stop yet.

I'm sure there's some reason for it - probably just as you've explained.

I was just pointing out how it is an aspect of the game that has evolved that I think is a little silly and overdone. It's has almost gotten to the point that it's impossible to play with a ball that has been defamed so much as to have actually touched the ground. What horrors!

"Whatever will we do? It ... uh ... it actually <gulp> touched the ground?"

<gasps of horror>

And then I simply pointed out that the ball-swapping ritual is now being done during, what would technically be, live ball action.

And then I asked for nothing more than OPINIONS.

I'm sure you are correct.

I disagree that the managers walk out onto the field in a MLB game before the BR reaches first on a walk.

Unlike Little League and HS fields, it is such a long walk that, for that reason alone, it never happens. Plus, they tend to saunter out there so slowly - it is never seen.

Sure, they may come out of the dugout and start heading that way, but the batter has usually reached first by the time they get anywhere near the foul line. Plus, if you've ever noticed, most coaches do not even gesture to the PU for time until some time after they have emerged from the dugout.

I'm going to start watching more closely - but I don't think I've ever seen a manager cross the foul line before the BR has reached first in a MLB game.

That's probably the best explanation. I agree.

Yet, I'll maintain that I don't think I've ever seen a MLB cross the foul line before a batter has reached 1st.

[QUOTE]David watch again. I bet we could fill this Forum with CONCRETE examples of a manager heading to the mound way before B1 reaches first base. This is accepted practice at the major league level.

How many times have you watched Joe Torre motioning for the great Rivera when the previous F1 walked the batter. The batter no sooner tosses his bat down and out comes Torre motioning for MO and it's not just Torre.


Back in the day you had guys really doctoring the baseball like Gaylord Perry. Since MLB is a billion dollar industry, they can afford new baseballs. Also, look at the REAL picture. Whenever an outfielder makes a catch for the third out it's commonplace for him to simply toss the ball in the stands.

Same is true for the ball Boys/Girls on the first/ third base side. They also toss balls into the stands etc.

FWIW you cannot compare what is done or accepted in MLB to what we do. Heck I bet most of us umpired games where we only had 1 / 2 baseballs left (scuffed or not) and if they were lost we were down to the "real scraps" that's the world of amateur baseball NOT even close to MLB.

Pete Booth

That's not where the field begins.

This doesn't have to be made into a big scene. It usually isn't. There doesn't need to be any melodramatic and overly officious attempt to embarrass the coach. I realize sometimes they get so excited that they want to burst out onto the field. A simple, subtle, and silent hand gesture usually conveys the message and the coach will generally slow down as he is walking out onto the field, giving the BR time to reach 1st. I subtly raise my index finger in the "just wait a sec" position and all is solved. They get it.

I'm not so anal as to require him to remain in the dugout but I do expect him to remain off the infield before the batter gets to 1st. In any case, the coach should know better. Most experienced coaches already know this and no intervention on the part of the umpire is usually required.

Wow. You disagree that something happens that in reality happens nearly every day in one MLB game or another.

This thread has now reached the absurd.

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 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.

[QUOTE=PeteBooth;623442]First of all, I agree that it is common for managers to exit the dugout before the batter reaches first but I disagree that they are actually on the field (i.e. crosses the foul line) before the BR reaches first - not even Joe Torre.

This thread has taken many twists. I do not pretend to suggest that what is done at the MLB level should always apply to amateur levels, and vice versa.

Two simple points:

1) I just expressed the opinion that I find it mildly annoying and anal as to how the ball-switching occurs so frequently at the MLB level, and

2) I found it mildly curious how there seems to be no concern that this switching occurs during a live ball situation where a runner is advancing.

I understand the explanations. I understand the unlikelihood that the BR is going to advance to 2nd.

Bob Jenkins thought it was analogous to runners "returning" after a foul ball. I don't think that is completely analogous because those runners are clearly not advancing whereas the BR is most definitely advancing. Yet, I see his point, and it's probably a good one.

Personally, while a BR is trotting down to 1st I would prefer to see the catcher throw the ball back to the pitcher -or- at least ask for a new ball -or- wait for me to hand him a new ball. Just as I do not honor a request for time by a relay man in the outfield, even though the runners have apparently stopped advancing. At least get the ball out of the outfield and into the infield before you start asking me to kill the play. Just like I do not honor an immediate request for time every time a runner returns to a base after a pickoff attempt unless, of course, we have one of those obnoxious fielders who will never take their glove off the runner. I say, throw the ball back to the pitcher and get up - all while the ball is live. Now, if they have a belt full of dirt, that's a different matter.

Apparently, reading comprehension is not a strong suit of yours, as you drive home once again with your condescending remarks on this thread. The irony is that while showing poor comprehension, you're downing this guy for his comprehension.

A new high.Apparently, comprehending humor is not your strong suit.

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

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???

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."

Oh-oooooo! The rising fastball has surfaced again! :D

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.

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.

Cheater????
 

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.

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.

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 <gasp!>.

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. :D

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.

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.

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.

a drill or a belt sander, I'm not sure which...
 

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.

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

And you as well, sir.

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. ;)

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.

Realistic, do you even umpire?

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.

Absolutley incredible.

If you are so unable to comprehend what is being said, instead of atttempting, in vain, to interpret what others intend, just bypass the posts that offend you. Everyone will be happier.

Would you like to make another try at that one?

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.

Exhibits A and B as to why it's easier just to delete posts and why, imo, that was the instruction I was given by the site owner.

Ump153 (and others): Please don't be so quick to search for little faults in what others say. If you think an answer is wrong, just answer the original post with what you think is the correct answer.

Kevin (and others): Please don't be so quick to assume that every disagreement is a personal attack and to respond in kind. Although you think you know what you said, it might be that what they read is not what you meant (or however that saying goes).

Dolt
 

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?