The CHECK SWING!

[Lonewolf986]

Can somebody explain how they (you personally) call the check swing and ask for help? I had one partner who told me, "I can't see it from B or C position, only when im down the line"

I told him that "if the catcher jumps in front of my vision right when I see the Batter 'flinch' then I need your help"

What do you think?

What is the exact definition, and what do YOU look for? Broken wrist, bat comes around, body twists, etc...?

[chris s]

Originally posted by Lonewolf986
Can somebody explain how they (you personally) call the check swing and ask for help? I had one partner who told me, "I can't see it from B or C position, only when im down the line"

I told him that "if the catcher jumps in front of my vision right when I see the Batter 'flinch' then I need your help"

What do you think?

What is the exact definition, and what do YOU look for? Broken wrist, bat comes around, body twists, etc...?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~`
What you need to look for is the batter attempting to strike at the ball. If a kid squares to bunt and leaves the bat out over the plate, pitch comes in over his head, he is NOT attempting to strike at the ball...keep it simple..

[Gee]

There is really nothing to prepare for as it is an instant thing and happens probably once or twice a game or two.

I call it a strike if the bat breaks the front plane of the plate but that could change depending on where the batter is standing.

The high and low pitches present a problem for the PU but it not that important for the PU to nail it. Your primary job is to call the zone and not the swing. If you miss it you miss it that's why they MAKE you go to your partner on the call of ball. If he can't see it he will just say "he didn't go" and signal safe because he has to call it something. Not a biggie. G.

[Lonewolf986]

thanks, appreciate the clarification guys!

[Bfair]

Originally posted by Lonewolf986

I had one partner who told me, "I can't see it from B or C position, only when im down the line"

That's hogwash........
While the PU can sometimes get blocked out by the actions of the catcher, the BU should always be able to see and judge. While some judgments may be more difficult to make than others, the BU should always be able to see the action to make the call. If he feels he can't make the call from B or C, then he needs not to be umpiring. It's required to be able to assist your partner from those positions when needed.


Freix

[Lonewolf986]

Originally posted by Bfair

That's hogwash........
While the PU can sometimes get blocked out by the actions of the catcher, the BU should always be able to see and judge. While some judgments may be more difficult to make than others, the BU should always be able to see the action to make the call. If he feels he can't make the call from B or C, then he needs not to be umpiring. It's required to be able to assist your partner from those positions when needed.


Freix

Yeah, I honestly figured him for being lazy.

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by Lonewolf986
Can somebody explain how they (you personally) call the check swing and ask for help? I had one partner who told me, "I can't see it from B or C position, only when im down the line"

I told him that "if the catcher jumps in front of my vision right when I see the Batter 'flinch' then I need your help"

What do you think?

What is the exact definition, and what do YOU look for? Broken wrist, bat comes around, body twists, etc...?

The only approved criterion for deciding whether a batter offered at the pitch or not on a half swing - aka checked swing - is contained in the NAPBL/PBUC Umpire Manual Section 1.12 and says:

The umpire's decision on a check swing shall be based entirely on his judgement as to whether or not the batter struck at the pitch.

That clearly lets out such arbitrary criteria as the bat breaking the plane at the front of the plate, the batter's body rotating or the batter's wrists uncocking (I prefer that term to "breaking his wrists" - that has other connotations for me. *grin*)

If you need some guidelines I would suggest the following:

1. Did the bat and ball arrive together over the plate at the same point in time?

2. Did the bat and ball pass by in proximity to each other BEFORE the forward motion of the swing was halted?

3. Did the batter begin to withdraw the bat BEFORE the ball arrived over the plate?

4. Was the bat motionless over the plate while the ball passed by well removed from proximity to the bat?

If the answer to BOTH 1 and 2 is "Yes", then I'd adjudge that the batter has failed to check his swing. If the answer to EITHER 3 or 4 is "Yes", then I'd adjudge that the batter has successfully checked his swing.

In order for the batter to have offered at the pitch, as required for a judgement of "Yes, he did swing", then the bat, ball and plate must all be in proximity to one another at roughly the same time.

• If the swing is obviously late, say well after the catcher has gloved the pitch, then even though the batter may have failed to check his swing he clearly didn't offer at the pitch.

• If the ball was 3 feet outside the batter's swing arc and in the dirt when it went by the plate, the batter may have failed to completely check his swing but he surely wouldn't have offered at the pitch

• If the batter's body rotated through 160 degrees, but the bat remained on his shoulder the whole time, then he clearly hasn't offered at the pitch

It is a judgement call, but save your judgement for the single question "Did the batter strike at the pitch" rather than worrying whether the bat broke the plane, the wrists uncocked or the batter's body twisted like a corkscrew.

BTW, you might want to consider reading my 3-part series entitled Help of a Half Swing, archived at Officiating.com, for a more detailed analysis of the check swing appeal, its limitations and applications. There are certain occasions, identified in those articles, when it is entirely appropriate to ignore or refuse a checked swing appeal, despite the clear requirements of Rule 9.02 Note.

Hope this helps.

Cheers

[GarthB]

If the swing is obviously late, say well after the catcher has gloved the pitch, then even though the batter may have failed to check his swing he clearly didn't offer at the pitch.


Warren:

With a R1 stealing second many coaches have a batter swing a bit late or slow enough to slow down the catcher without committing obvious interference. In these cases I rule that "yes indeedy, he went". I suppose I could call interference on the batter, but in these cases it's a tough sell and I choose to penalize the offense with the call that will bring about the lesser of the sh$t houses.

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by GarthB
If the swing is obviously late, say well after the catcher has gloved the pitch, then even though the batter may have failed to check his swing he clearly didn't offer at the pitch.


Warren:

With a R1 stealing second many coaches have a batter swing a bit late or slow enough to slow down the catcher without committing obvious interference. In these cases I rule that "yes indeedy, he went". I suppose I could call interference on the batter, but in these cases it's a tough sell and I choose to penalize the offense with the call that will bring about the lesser of the sh$t houses.

Point taken, GB.

The case I was thinking about occurred late in the game during a District League Div 2 fixture. The defense was short of pitching, so they were forced to leave a very ordinary pitcher on the mound - one we call a "pie chucker", because the ball travels so slow and is so easy to follow that it looks as big as a pie. He was ordinary enough that he had great trouble finding the zone most of the time. The offensive batters were figuratively licking their lips at the opportunity before them.

When the next batter, a known slugger, came to the plate the count agonized out to 3-1. On the next pitch the ball was clearly up, although it was over the plate. The batter's first instincts took over, and he didn't offer right away. However, milliseconds after the ball hit the catcher's glove he realised that he had probably missed his last opportunity to smack one over the fence, so he swung the bat! I called "Ball four. No he didn't go" and followed that with an explanatory "Alex, if you're going to convince me you've swung you'll have to do a lot better than that. Take your base." The catcher never said a word. He knew I'd done his pitcher a favor.

I'm not talking about a swing calculated to interfere with the catcher. I'd probably prefer to call the interference in such cases, but I take your point about the hard sell. The point was that there was no dispute that the batter swung - it just wasn't "at the pitch", which was clearly over before the swing began. That's more than "a bit late", wouldn't you say? *grin*

Cheers

[His High Holiness]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Warren Willson

...When the next batter, a known slugger, came to the plate the count agonized out to 3-1. On the next pitch the ball was clearly up, although it was over the plate. The batter's first instincts took over, and he didn't offer right away. However, milliseconds after the ball hit the catcher's glove he realised that he had probably missed his last opportunity to smack one over the fence, so he swung the bat! I called "Ball four. No he didn't go" and followed that with an explanatory "Alex, if you're going to convince me you've swung you'll have to do a lot better than that. Take your base." The catcher never said a word. He knew I'd done his pitcher a favor.


Cheers

Warren;

Last year, I told of a case where the pitcher was giving an intentional walk when the count went to 3-0. The batter swung at air as the next pitch was delivered 2-3 feet outside. The batter made no attempt to hit the ball, he just wanted to delay the inevitible and make the pitcher throw more pitches. Since I knew that the next pitch would be at his head, I ruled "No, he did not go!" and sent him to first base. The OFFENSIVE coach came out and wanted me to check with my partner. I told him that only the catcher could make that appeal and the catcher smiled at the other coach and said "No dice" or words to that effect. The coach, being stymied, went back to the dugout. The batter apologized to me after the game for he realized that his actions could have had severe repercussions.

Anyway, I created a huge contoversy, not at the game, but on this forum with that post. You, on the other hand, did not even generate one reply. (grin)

Peter

[GarthB]

Peter:

And as you may recall, surpisingly, I wasn't one who joined the outcry. Instead, I believe that I agreed that you correct to the letter of the rule, but I pondered, as I do now, if that's the call that they would make in the Majors.

I wish my memory was better at my age, because I know I saw Willie McCovey swing half heartedly durinf an intentional walk at Candlestick in the 60's. I cannot for the life of me remember what the umpire ruled. I just recall the fans laughing.

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by His High Holiness
...Anyway, I created a huge contoversy, not at the game, but on this forum with that post. You, on the other hand, did not even generate one reply. (grin)

Peter

Peter, we've both called a lot of ball at a level where the players shave, so we both know only too well that you frequently have to temper what you call with a liberal dose of game management. I don't remember that post of yours. Perhaps it came during the long period of my absence from this forum. Sounds like you made a pretty fair call to me. *grin*

As for not generating a single reply, don't forget that could easily translate as apathy toward me and my opinions! *BIG grin*

Cheers

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Following Rule 10-1-4 Federation rules make the following comment:

NOTE: The umpire-in-shief- sometimes asks for aid from the base umpire when there is a question as to whether a batter's "half-swing" is such to be called a strike. As an aid in deciding, the umpire may note whether the swing carried the barrel of the bast past the body of the batter, [b] but final decision is based on whetehr the batter actually struck at the ball.[b] emphasis mine

As said by others, although this note give a possible method for helping make the decision based upon furthest extent of the bat, the final decision is to be based upon the umpire's interpretation of the batter's intent.

In general, the batter is obviously indecisive as to whether he should be swinging or not, so I help confirm his indecision. "Yes, you went."

I can't think of a time when I have been questioned for saying that the batter did go. But there have been numerous "situations" precipitated by saying no he didn't go. The defense always wants the strike called. The offense recognizes the indecision of the batter and generally tolerates the strike call.

As stated by those before me, the situation can also determine the proper call.

[woolnojg]

Wolf,
to answer the second part of your question. I always pre-gamed this with partners. It usually went," I'll only ask if you're in A. If I ask quickly and point to you with my right hand, tell me what you saw. If I ask slowly and point to you with my left hand, I want my call to stand." If he offers assistance based on the catcher or coach asking, he gets the "death stare".

[gobama84]

Originally posted by woolnojg
Wolf,
to answer the second part of your question. I always pre-gamed this with partners. It usually went," I'll only ask if you're in A. If I ask quickly and point to you with my right hand, tell me what you saw. If I ask slowly and point to you with my left hand, I want my call to stand." If he offers assistance based on the catcher or coach asking, he gets the "death stare".

Let me make sure I don't call with you. If you ask me, I'll tell you what I saw period. If you don't want to know don't ask period.