The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 08, 2012, 11:16am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 1,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStrybel View Post
A batter is considered offensive personnel and by definition, the defense responds to his actions.
It's the other way around in baseball - the only team sport where the defense controls the ball.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 08, 2012, 01:03pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Northwest suburbs of Chicago
Posts: 645
Quote:
Originally Posted by dash_riprock View Post
It's the other way around in baseball - the only team sport where the defense controls the ball.
Only when my Cubbies are playing.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 08, 2012, 01:33pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 1,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStrybel View Post
Only when my Cubbies are playing.
At least you get to go to a great ballpark. I can't do that anymore.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 08, 2012, 08:46pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: At the base of the mountains
Posts: 377
Being this was a MiLB game, per PBUC 6.15

"In the rare occassion of an ambidextrous pitcher, the pitcher and the batter may each change position one time per at bat".

This rule was in affect at the time of this play. It's a rare as hell event, obviously not a section we read often. Obviously PU either didn't know it or remember it.

This is directly out of the 04 edition p76 of the PBUC Umpire manual 04 edition.
__________________
Its' not a matter of being right or wrong, it's a matter of working hard to get it right.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 08, 2012, 09:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,186
PU knew it, but when does the "switch" take place. Neither had declared, so neither had switched. Thus, the rule change.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 09, 2012, 08:12am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Northwest suburbs of Chicago
Posts: 645
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
PU knew it, but when does the "switch" take place. Neither had declared, so neither had switched. Thus, the rule change.
Venditte knew the rule, evidenced by his request for time and signalling to the PU that the batter can change one time. The crew allegedly knew the rule but it appears that the batter didn't.

Venditte stayed off the rubber until he saw the batter step into the box. It would appear that the batter made his decision and the pitcher responded. That would seem to indicate his switch. The rule in place at the time would have prohibited him from changing sides again during that at bat. No verbal 'declaration' was required back then.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 09, 2012, 11:22am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStrybel View Post
Venditte knew the rule, evidenced by his request for time and signalling to the PU that the batter can change one time. The crew allegedly knew the rule but it appears that the batter didn't.

Venditte stayed off the rubber until he saw the batter step into the box. It would appear that the batter made his decision and the pitcher responded. That would seem to indicate his switch. The rule in place at the time would have prohibited him from changing sides again during that at bat. No verbal 'declaration' was required back then.
No verbal declaration is required now either.

What makes you think the batter didn't know the rule or that the crew allegedly knew the rule? The old rule was "In the rare occassion of an ambidextrous pitcher, the pitcher and the batter may each change position one time per at bat" But "at bat" was not a defined term; no one knew exactly when an at bat started.

You try to make it sound like you would have known exactly what to do, that you know what the rules meant. But the rules were very unclear, there was no way for you to know. The rules were so unclear that the rules were changed to address this exact situation.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 09, 2012, 03:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Northwest suburbs of Chicago
Posts: 645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cobra View Post
No verbal declaration is required now either.
I responded to Bob's statement that 'neither had declared'. In post #7 I provided the current PBUC standard. Both the pitcher and batter must inform the PU of an intent to change. That would be a declaration.

Quote:
What makes you think the batter didn't know the rule or that the crew allegedly knew the rule?
Okay, maybe he knew the rule and was simply trying to get away with breaking it.

Quote:
The old rule was "In the rare occassion of an ambidextrous pitcher, the pitcher and the batter may each change position one time per at bat" But "at bat" was not a defined term; no one knew exactly when an at bat started.
Really?

Quote:
You try to make it sound like you would have known exactly what to do, that you know what the rules meant. But the rules were very unclear, there was no way for you to know. The rules were so unclear that the rules were changed to address this exact situation.
The rule was not changed. It was merely clarified to put the onus on the pitcher for demonstrating intent. Both players involved are still allowed one change per at bat. See post #7.

We have several guidelines to use for batters being 'at bat'. Are you implying that you are unclear what constitutes such?

I believe that I would not have let this matter drag on for several minutes, like they did. At minimum, I would have conferred with my partner and set a course of action that would get the game going quicker. There are numerous TWPs that are not mentioned specifically in the rule book. Sometimes we just have to umpire.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 09, 2012, 04:25pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStrybel View Post
In post #7 I provided the current PBUC standard.
The current standard is something from 2008...something that was written before the Official Baseball Rules were changed to address this situation?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStrybel View Post
Both the pitcher and batter must inform the PU of an intent to change. That would be a declaration.
Once again you should refer to the OBR, not something from 2008.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStrybel View Post
The rule was not changed.
Look in the front of the 2009 OBR. Under rule changes you will see 8.01f.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStrybel View Post
We have several guidelines to use for batters being 'at bat'. Are you implying that you are unclear what constitutes such?
I'm saying at bat was not, and is still not a defined term. So saying they could switch once per at bat was very unclear. That is why the rules were changed.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 08, 2012, 10:52pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NY state
Posts: 1,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherblue View Post
Being this was a MiLB game, per PBUC 6.15

"In the rare occassion of an ambidextrous pitcher, the pitcher and the batter may each change position one time per at bat".

This rule was in affect at the time of this play. It's a rare as hell event, obviously not a section we read often. Obviously PU either didn't know it or remember it.

This is directly out of the 04 edition p76 of the PBUC Umpire manual 04 edition.
Yes, and both the crew and the PBUC evaluators were cognizant of the rule. However, due, in part, to the issue Bob raised above, it was decided that more definitive wording was needed after the incident.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
OBR Ambidexterous pitcher JJ Baseball 35 Wed Aug 16, 2006 09:20am
DH for a non-pitcher akalsey Baseball 17 Sat Jun 12, 2004 10:43am
Need Help..New Pitcher brentm Baseball 0 Wed Jul 16, 2003 12:28am
Pitcher Big Man Baseball 6 Tue May 20, 2003 03:32pm
Pitcher Can Larry Softball 3 Wed Jun 19, 2002 11:48pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:46am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1