Batter's Box Question
 

I was watching the Braves/Marlins game tonight, and early in the game, one of the Marlins players laid down a bunt. As his bat made contact with the ball, his right foot was entirely inside the batter's box, and his left foot was partially inside the batter's box, and the back part of his left foot was between the batter's box and the catcher.

As they showed the replay, the TV commentators started saying that he should have been called out. I didn't think that was right because I thought that as long as part of the foot was inside the box, it was okay. Am I correct there, or is the TV guy right?

Thanks in advance.

The rule says the foot has to be entirely outside the batter's box.

Red flag numbers 1, 2, and 3. For the batter to be out, his foot would have to be completely out of the box. If the batter's foot is touching any part of the line, for the purpose of the rule, he is still in the box.

Unless it is Steve Palermo talking on a Fox broadcast...whenever you have to ask this question the answer is "No". :D

Very well put.

And just on the topic of making that call as an official...Can't we all agree that it's a very tough call to make unless something extraordinary happens? My eyes are tracking the pitch. I don't have an extra one to peak down at his feet. It would have to be clear as day with a little help from a partner. My point is, these TV announcers are constantly looking for inconsistencies and rarely stop to think about the priorities of the umpire.

I would never go to my partner on a batter's box issue.

While I agree with you for the most part, I think MIZFKU brings up a good point about tracking the pitch. One of the reasons for getting help on check/half swings is because it is impossible to have "one eye on the pitch and the other eye on the swing". Doesn't that same line of thinking apply to a play like this... ie, you can't have one eye on the pitch location/bunt attempt and the other eye on the batter's foot out of the box?

Now, I know that a base umpire positioned 90+ feet away isn't likely to see where that foot is in relation to the semi "wiped out" lines of the batter's box but I think you can see the point we're trying to make here. Unless you're looking for something like that (ie, you know that particular batter likes to drag bunt a lot), this is an extremely difficult call for the plate umpire to make... not to mention its usually the batter's FRONT foot (the fartherst part of the batter's body away from the umpire) that tends to be outside the box on plays like this.

Don't get me wrong, as a PU, I'm probably not going to get help on a play like this because I'd probably be putting my partner in a tough position because if the call does get changed, then one of us is likely going to have an EJ from the opposing coach. BUT, as a point of discussion amongst us umpires, is it necessarily a bad thing to get input from your partner in case, by chance, he happend to actually see the foot outside the box at the point of contact? Unless of course you're that special umpire who can have one eye look one way and the other look in a different direction ;) Just something to think about...

Batter's box question
 

:eek:The announcer must have been Tim McCarver. Sounds like one of his brilliant comment about a game he says he played?

Thanks UES. I agree with all of you. I'm never going to my partner to say "Hey, I think he stepped out of the box. What do you have?" But it was just the idea of it. That's a call I'm never making unless I have been tipped off on a certain batter. And it's my hope that young umps learning the trade may read a conversation like this and pick up on some subtle mechanical hints. TWO EYES ON THE BALL....HEAD STATIONARY!!!

WTF?

That's when it's the EASIEST for PU to make the call. Foot, pitch, and bat are all parallaxically close.

Never generalize. This call can be made in more than a few circumstances.

Well, I'm just a fan, so I'm certainly no rules expert. In this case, I thought I knew the rule but wasn't sure. I do remember actually learning a rule from Joe Morgan a few years ago. In a Sunday night ESPN game, a batter who had a 2 strike count attempted to bunt and popped it up foul. My first thought was that it was an immediate dead ball and the batter was out since he bunted a ball foul with 2 strikes. However, on this play, the third baseman caught the ball. Morgan then explained how that was a bad play because it gave the runners the potential to tag up (even though they didn't). He explained that he should have let it drop to make sure that no runners advanced. That was new to me, and I discovered Morgan was correct.

So, some broadcasters do know what they're talking about. I think that most of them know a lot more about game strategy than they do about rules.

And that's what Morgan's situation was: game strategy. Any casual fan of baseball knows bunting foul with two strikes is an out, and any fan of baseball knows a bunted ball caught before hitting the ground is an out. However, a casual fan wouldn't think about the situation given by Morgan.

There's a similar one: With less than two outs and a lazy foul fly to the outfield, should the outfielder catch the ball?

Joe Morgan is wrong 99.99% of the time on rules. This was the one time in a thousand he was correct.

As was stated before, Steve Palermo is the only "announcer" that knows what he is talking about when it comes to rules. Joe Morgan knows the game and situations but as a former player, Joe is weak on the rules and the concepts. Most of what you hear from announcers are the myths of baseball rules (hands are part of the bat, the runner gets the base he was going to +1, etc.) and because people (fans) think that these bozos know what they are talking about, the festering of myths continues.

If you really want to know rules, keep reading the umpire boards and download the MLB rules (PDF version) from MLB Downloadable Rules. Then when a weird play happens, you can tell your buddies what the real reason was that the umpires made that call.

Enjoy the game!

Even a blind squirrel bumps into nut now and then.

Since we're talking about broadcasters, I'll tell one from several years ago where a TV broadcaster actually tried to find the right information, then ultimately praised the umpiring crew--but for the wrong reason.

Several years ago, I was watching an MLB game on TV when there was a base hit down into the right field corner. When the play started, there was a runner at 1st. As the ball rolled around in the RF corner, a fan reached over the wall and touched the ball. Fan interference was called. Watching the game live, I thought I knew the rule (and I later checked online at MLB.com and discovered I was right) that when there was fan interference, the umpires used their judgement to determine where to place the runners. In this case, they allowed the runner at 1B to score and awarded the batter second. The TV guy was very confused, saying that he had never before seen one runner awarded 3 bases and one runner awarded 2 bases. Then, he said, "But, let me check the rule book."

Obvioulsy, that's not an easy thing to do when you're live on the air, so I was impressed that he was trying to get the right info rather than to blast the umpires. A few minutes later, they made the 3rd out and went to a commercial. As they left the air, he said that he would keep looking. When they returned back from the commercial, he was praising the umpires--saying that if the runner has already reached 2B, they can award him 2 bases from that point!!

To this day, I have no idea what rule he found that led him to believe that. However, I did gain a lot of respect for him for not jumping to conclusions when it first happened, for actually looking in the rule book and trying to find the rule that applied, and for praising the umpires for getting it right--even if he was praising them for the wrong reason!

Now that's funny.

And always true.

Yes. As MU said, it is the only generalization that is true.

Only if you simplistically fail to distinguish between general truths and universal truths. :cool:

You are right, TV guy, as usual, wrong. No surprises here.

In all fairness to announcers, I've never heard Vin Scully misinterpret basic rules such as this one. He is a true professional.