dropped third strike

[gotblue?]

Originally Posted by Forest Ump

It's there to protect the offense from getting a cheap double play. The game is balanced between offense and defense.

I am not trying to take this part of your post out of context, but I think that there may be a disconnect here.

An uncaught third strike would only result in a cheap double play if the rule is that a batter is allowed to advance on any uncaught third strike where there would be, as a result of the baserunner being able to advance, forces at at least two bases (i.e., 1B occupied), with less than two out, or if there are already two out. So, yes, the current rule prevents such a cheap DP.

Those who are arguing that the rule makes no sense seem to be arguing that the concept of allowing a batter to attempt to attain 1B after a 3rd strike (caught or uncaught) should be done away with, and/or, possibly, in their minds, should never have been part of the rules. If the batter is not able to attempt to attain 1B, then no baserunners are being forced to advance, and no "cheap" DPs are available.

I think those in the latter camp are questioning why there was ever a rule allowing the batter to advance after "striking out". Have I missed the rationale for this? (other than a couple of opinions, from well-regarded posters, that it possibl was intended to make the game more exciting)? Also, it appears that the rule was changed along the way to allowing a batter to attempt to attain 1B only on an "uncaught" third strike, as opposed to any third strike. If that is correct, what was the rationale for that rule change?

[Matt]

Originally Posted by gotblue?

I think those in the latter camp are questioning why there was ever a rule allowing the batter to advance after "striking out". Have I missed the rationale for this? (other than a couple of opinions, from well-regarded posters, that it possibl was intended to make the game more exciting)? Also, it appears that the rule was changed along the way to allowing a batter to attempt to attain 1B only on an "uncaught" third strike, as opposed to any third strike. If that is correct, what was the rationale for that rule change?

The reasoning is that the defense has to complete a play to get an out, whether it is a tag of a base or runner, a caught batted ball, or a strikeout. Without a caught third strike, the defense has not completed the play.

Now, here's where the avoidance of a cheap double play comes in. The rule is written as such to prevent the defense from not completing the play and gaining an advantage by doing so (similar to an intentionally dropped batted ball in the infield or the infield fly rule.)

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by gotblue?

I think those in the latter camp are questioning why there was ever a rule allowing the batter to advance after "striking out". Have I missed the rationale for this? (other than a couple of opinions, from well-regarded posters, that it possibl was intended to make the game more exciting)? Also, it appears that the rule was changed along the way to allowing a batter to attempt to attain 1B only on an "uncaught" third strike, as opposed to any third strike. If that is correct, what was the rationale for that rule change?

It's been in the game from the beginning.

First, the batter became a runner on every "third" strike (or whatever the number was then).

When the catcher played well back of the batter, and the ball was softer and quickly became out-of-round, and no one used gloves, it was no sure thing that the BR would be out.

As the catcher moved to the current position, and used gloves, it became "boring" to have to make the play when the strike was caught. So, the rule was changed so that the batter became a runner only when the strike was uncaught.

Then, crafty catchers realized they could get two outs if they didn't catch the third strike in certain situations. So, the rule was changed to the current rule.

[mbyron]

Thanks, Bob.

I will add that the idea of a "cheap" double play should not be part of an umpire's vocabulary. If the rules permit a double play in a given situation, then it's not our business how the defense got it or whether it was "fair" or "cheap."

For an umpire, the rules define fairness. Unfair is playing outside the rules. (Students of the game are entitled to a different perspective, but be careful which hat you're wearing and who your audience is.)

[Rich]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Thanks, Bob.

I will add that the idea of a "cheap" double play should not be part of an umpire's vocabulary. If the rules permit a double play in a given situation, then it's not our business how the defense got it or whether it was "fair" or "cheap."

For an umpire, the rules define fairness. Unfair is playing outside the rules. (Students of the game are entitled to a different perspective, but be careful which hat you're wearing and who your audience is.)

The notion of fairness and not allowing a cheap double play drives a few of the rules -- the infield fly, the uncaught third strike, and the intentionally dropped ball -- and understanding the reasoning behind the rules certainly helps in their enforcement.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

It's been in the game from the beginning.

First, the batter became a runner on every "third" strike (or whatever the number was then).

When the catcher played well back of the batter, and the ball was softer and quickly became out-of-round, and no one used gloves, it was no sure thing that the BR would be out.

As the catcher moved to the current position, and used gloves, it became "boring" to have to make the play when the strike was caught. So, the rule was changed so that the batter became a runner only when the strike was uncaught.

Then, crafty catchers realized they could get two outs if they didn't catch the third strike in certain situations. So, the rule was changed to the current rule.

The NFHS rule used to read that the batter becomes a batter runner on every third strike and in another section it said the batter is out when a third strike is caught or when first is occupied with less than two outs.

May still say this, but I don't think so (and I'm not looking it up now).

[yawetag]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

The NFHS rule used to read that the batter becomes a batter runner on every third strike and in another section it said the batter is out when a third strike is caught or when first is occupied with less than two outs.

May still say this, but I don't think so (and I'm not looking it up now).

8-1-1. A batter becomes a runner with the right to attempt to score by advancing to first, second, third and home bases in the listed order when: b. he is charged with a third strike; 1. If third strike is caught, he is out an instant after he becomes a runner.

[stratref]

Since so many of you are trying to explain how we got to where we are today with the rule, many of you are not going back far enough into the history of the game.

We are talking 1870's era ball, this was when the batsman was allowed to declare, "high", "low", "neither" as his preferred striking zone. It took 9 balls for a walk and 8 strikes for a batter to become "struck" (BTW the umpire had the option at the time to declare a pitch neither a strike or a ball).

This term "struck" is where we get the "K" from for a strikeout, because the "S" had already been used for the sacrifice.

I could go on for a page or so to explain why the rule is what it is today but to really see why here is a link going over the rule changes since the game of the 1840's Baseball History: 19th Century Baseball: The Rules

Jasper

[yawetag]

From Annotated OBR:

Historical Notes: The original Major League Code (1876) provided that the batsman was out if, after three strikes, the ball was legally held at first base before the batsman reached the base. He was also out provided the ball was caught by the catcher before touching the ground or after only one bounce. One must remember that catchers generally positioned themselves a considerable distance from the plate and it was the exception rather than the rule for the catcher to catch the pitch before it touched the ground.

The 1880 edition of the Official Playing Rules of the National League amplified this interpretation. A batter was out following three strikes if the ball was momentarily held before touching the ground, no hat or cap was used in securing possession, the pitch did not hit some other object before being secured. (These conditions were later encompassed in the term "legally caught".)

The first official case book ruling of “legally caught” appeared in the early 1950's and disallowed any ball which lodged in the catcher's clothing or equipment. The additional explanation regarding balls tipped and subsequently caught or not caught was added in 1976.

And, for runner on first with less than two outs:
Historical Notes: In 1887, the provision declaring the batter automatically out regardless of whether or not the final strike was caught was incorporated into the rules. An asterisk should be noted beside the year 1887 for it was in that year that the experimental "four strikes" were allowed.

The Major League Code of 1888 stipulated that a batter shall be declared out on three strikes (regardless of whether the ball is caught or not) when first base is occupied' "...except when two hands are already out." This is the identical interpretation used today.

The 1942 rule book noted that “...This rule was adopted to prevent the catcher from dropping the ball purposely to ensure a double play.”