The CHECK SWING!

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by IHSAIllini
For anyone who's posted that they indicate whether or not they want their call to stand at the dish: this is a clear violation of the rules. And I don't mean one of those pesky grey areas where we get to use our judgement, but a clear, unflinching violation of both the spirit and letter of the law.

Steve, there are MANY cases where by History or Tradition umpires clearly violate the rules. Allowing fielders stationed outside the 90 foot square as infielders for the purposes of the Infield Fly rule is one. Allowing that the runner creates his own base path, contrary to 7.08(a.1) is another. Not calling the balk penalty under 4.03(a) during an intentional base on balls is still another. (When was the last time you saw that called in a pro ball park?)

The 1976 Note appended following OBR 9.02(c) is an anachronism. The spirit and intent of the original rule was to permit the umpire to ask for help if needed, not to require him to do so and be overruled at the behest of the defense.

The current 1976 Note is a reflection of the early 70's belief that the best way to judge a half swing was to note whether or not the barrel of the bat broke the plane at the front of the plate. It bred the assumption that the BU in position A or D was in the best place to make that call.

NAPBL/PBUC 1.12 clearly demonstrates that is NOT how umpires are expected to judge check swings these days. Given current expectations, unless unsighted the PU is clearly in the best position to judge - having the bat, ball and plate all within his immediate field of vision.

For that reason most crews at upper levels will NOT overrule a check swing decision made at the plate. That is demonstrated by the PU using the "Ball; no he didn't go" mechanic approved by the UDP. The use of "Ball" only is similarly treated as if the PU was unsighted, and the BU should therefore respond with his next best opinion on the check attempt.

Hope this helps

Cheers