Stepping Out of the Box W/O Timeout Granted
 

High school. BR steps out of the box while the pitcher is beginning his motion. Umpire does not grant time.

I am NOT an umpire but I thought I've read on here previously that in FED the pitch is an automatic strike regardless of where it is. Am I making that up?

So two questions:

1. Am I right or wrong in my memory?
2. What if the pitcher stops and there are runners? Nothing? Balk?

To answer your questions. Yes, it is a strike. You're also forgetting the penalty strike also. So it's two strikes for stepping out of the box and the pitcher delivers.

If the pitcher stops with runners on base after the batter steps out, it's nothing. It's a reset.

This is all covered in Rule 8 of the NFHS Rule book and Casebook.

Thanks.

Let me make sure I follow.

Pitcher continues with the pitch: Are you saying that it's automatically a strike regardless of where it lands AND if it was truly a strike then the result is 2 strikes added to the count?

I do not have a FED rulebook/casebook so I appreciate your help.

No, It's two strikes period for the batter stepping out with time not granted and the pitcher delivers the pitch. One on the Pitch anywhere (Location doesn't matter), AND one for stepping out of the box.

Thanks for the clarification. I've never witnessed this. Is it something you rarely see as an umpire?

For my friends who will say I'm crazy can you point me to the rule in the NFHS book? 8 what?

Misspoke. Its in rule 7.3.1

It's something that you should never see.

The assumption in rule 6-2-4d and case 6.2.4I is that the batter has delayed the game by stepping out. If the umpire so judges, then, yes, two strikes can be called.

That rule and case weren't changed when the phrase "and delays the game" was added to 7-3-1 PEN. See 7.3.1F for the "right" rule -- "If the umpire felt that the game was delayed, he shall charge a strike to B1. Because of the additional strike which now has been called, the batter is declared out."

Exactly. Although 6.2.4 I seems to indicate that the penalty strike for stepping out is automatic, it is not, as supported by 7.3.1 D, F, G and H (and perhaps others).

6.2.4(d) _is a balk for not delivering a pitch.
6.2.4(d)1 is the exception to this balk. If F1 stops or hesitates his delivery this would be a balk if not for B stepping out of the box exception. This penalty is ONLY for causing the absolved balk (he hesitated/not continuous delivery) but he does deliver the delayed/hesitated pitch. One strike for stepping out of the box, one strike for causing an (absolved) balk.

And I agree that this double penalty should be saved for the when you REALLY want to make a point.

I don't think so. One strike is for the pitch (called a strike regardless of location), the other is for violating 7-3-1 (delay of game).

The batter needs to step out with BOTH feet in order for the umpire to call an automatic strike (6-2-4-D) If he steps out with one foot or holds up a hand asking for time and delivers a pitch it is a strike. If he steps out with only one foot or holds up his hand asking for time and the pitcher stops, it is a reset and no penalty on either the batter or hitter. Only way to have two strikes called is for the hitter to step out with BOTH feet. page 41 of NFHS rule book

I disagree. From the way I read the rule, the batter must step completely out of the batter's box for an automatic strike to be called on the pitch. In your cases above, I'm calling the pitch the way it is.

From page 41..."If the pitcher legally delivers the ball, it shall be called a strike and the ball remains live." This is referring to situations A, B, and C. Situation "A" is with runners on base and the batter steps out with one foot and the pitcher legally delivers a pitch to the batter.

There is no automatic strike for stepping out with both feet (other than the called strike on a legally delivered pitch). The batter must also delay the game for the penalty strike.

I have one strike for violating 7-3-1. If you have second strike and its not for violating 6-4-1(d) (no balk to absolve), what other rule violation do you have ?

The 6-2-4-d-1 strike is not for absolving a balk, it is for the pitch. "...if the pitcher legally delivers the ball, it shall be called a strike and the ball remains live."

Yes, of course, but we were talking about when a second strike can be called. Lets assume that we have one strike for 7-3-1, delaying the game violation. Lets discuss the second strike. I am confused about RB versus CB passages.

RB 6-2-4(d)1- starts off,
If the pitcher with a runner on base stops or hesitates in his delivery because the batter steps out of the box...
...access a strike if hesitated pitch is delivered, no strike accessed if delivery is stopped, no balk in either case. But everything in 6-2-4(d)1 is predicated on a delivery that stops or hesitates .

But CB 6.2.4I is not consistant with RB 6-2-4(d)1. In the CB a second penalty strike is accessed without any mention of any hesitated delivery (the only condition that I see in 6-2-4(d)1 for accessing a second strike).

I don't understand where the CB gets it's justification for the second strike on a non-hestitatedly delivered pitch when B steps out of the box. If anyone can help me understand how CB 6.2.4I justifies the second strike, I'd appreciate it.

It doesn't matter if he hesitates or not, only that if he does, it is not a balk. The strikes have nothing to do with the hesitation.

Here's my problem with the second strike: If the batter steps out with both feet, and F1 delivers a pitch (hesitated or not) I don't see how 7-3-1 could apply. The pitcher delivered the ball and it was called a strike. How did the batter delay the game?

If there is no hesitation or stop, then none of 6-2-4 applies.If I have learned anything from participating in forums such as this, it is that one can only apply rules/penalties to those conditions specified in the RB. One can not carry the rule over to non-specified conditions, just because it seems to make sense to do so.

Maybe if I can help you understand why you get a strike for 7-3-1, you can help me understand how you get another strike for violating 6-2-4(d)1 or any another rule.

7-3-1 A batter shall not: delay the game by failing to take his position promptly in the batter’s box within 20 seconds. To me, the clock is still running even after the batter initially gets in the box. If he steps out again before F1 has delivered a pitch and the 20 seconds has expired, he has violated 7-3-1. And the rule also states that The batter must keep at least one foot in the batter’s box throughout the time at bat (except for the list of exceptions given). Once he is back in the BB, none of the exceptions apply, he can not again leave the BB. So you really have two reasons to bust him on 7-3-1. (the 20 second time limit and not staying in the BB).

6-2-4 are the Fed balk rules. 6-2-4(d) is the specific balk condition of F1 stopping or hesitating his delivery. 6-2-4(d)1 is the conditions when a balk under 6-2-4(d) is not applied, and it specifies conditions where an additional penalty is given to the batter. This exemption from the balk and the penalty associated with it are all predicated on the specified conditions of 6-2-4(d)1 the pitcher...stops or hesitates in his delivery.

If F1 did not stop or hesitate in his delivery, then none of Fed 6-2-4 balk rules apply, including 6-2-4(d) or 6-2-4(d)1. If anyone can find cause for a strike other than 7-3-1, I really want to know what it is. Please use a RB reference to justify a second strike.

Because the last part of 6-2-4(d)1 starts with "If the pitcher legally delivers the ball ..." which means that it's an exception to / clarification of the "hesitation" statement earlier.

And, to be clear, it only applies if the batter then doesn't get back in the box in 20 seconds.

Play: B1 steps out w/ 2 feet; F1 stops delivery. Has the game been delayed? Yes. Penalty: None.

Play: B1 steps out w/ 2 feet; F1 delivers. Has the game been delayed? No. Penalty: Two strikes!? GMAFB.

0-0 count. The batter steps out with both feet, F1 legally delivers a pitch (sans hesitation) which is 4 feet outside. Is the count now 1-1?

But that last part that you referenced does not start as you stated. The beginning of that sentence is: In (a),(b), and (c), if the pitcher legally delivers the ball ..." The a/b/c is still talking about the original conditions of 6-2-4(d)1, the F1 that stops or hesitates. Sorry, I still don't see how any of 6-2-4(d)1 applies without a stop or hesitation of the delivery.
That's a good example of why keeping the ball live could be a virtual problem. Are we playing RB jeopardy or game management jeopardy? Lets keep it real...game management jeopardy. Issuing a ball in sitch is just begging for the beanball episode. I'm issuing one strike or two strike, depending on how big a PITA I've got.

If one strike, its either on 7-3-1, or because my KZ reference was gone and I might have been distracted from the pitch location looking where B's both feet were or my penalty strike mechanics distracted me from seeing the pitch 4 feet outside...take your pick. If you want to argue that he ball/pitch was live, I think the pitch was a strike and his second foot didn't quite make it out of BB.

If B or offense is a big PITA, then two strikes one with 7.3.1 violation and I think the pitch was a strike. If the offense is a REALLY big PITA, then B is also ejected for 3-3-1o violation. I'm not escalating, I'm trying to de-escalate.

But I still don't see how 6-2-4(x) (the balk rules) applies to any of this. There is no F1 rule violations to apply or disregard.

The "(a) (b) and (c)" means the stepping out / holding up the hand part. It doesn't mean the pitcher "stops or hesitates" because then the pitcher CAN"T "legally deliver the ball" as listed in the sentence.

You're trying to give the editor too much credit for logical writing.

That is the only/best explanation that I have for the apparent (to me) RB/CB inconsistency.

But it still troubles me that if there is no F1 violation to penalize or disregard, why are we using anything in 6-2-4.

When I become NFHS baseball rules god, 7.3.1 will have a one strike penalty for stepping out of BB whether F1 delivers or not (one penalty strike should surfice), keep 3-3-1o for the PITA situations, and use 6-2-4(d)1 to only absolve F1 from a balk if B steps out of BB...where do I apply for the god gig? :)

When I become NFHS baseball rules god...

It the batter steps out with one or both feet without time granted and:

1. The plate guy doesn't stop F1 who:
a. Then legally delivers a pitch, the pitch is called on its merits;
b. Violates a pitching proscription, then ball/balk penalty is enforced;

2. The plate guy stops F1 and orders the batter back in the box who:
a. Delays complying, strike called without a pitch and order batter back in the box with a warning;
b. Delays complying after being warned, ejected and team warned; or,
c. Complies, then hits off the wall in the gap but is thrown out trying to stretch a rally-hit into a triple to end his team's half inning because he violated a cardinal rule in baserunning right in front of his Skipper who is in the 3B coaching box.

"If you don't think too good, then don't think too much." Who said that? I read it somewhere, but my memory module hasn't been updated in a while.

0-1. Restart the 20-second clock.

Has the batter delayed the game? I say yes. By stepping out he is hoping to f%^k with the pitcher! If the pitcher delivers this means he didn't do a very goog job.Sometimes you just have to umpire.

Honestly, I do not believe the intent of any of these rules was to create 2 strikes on a single pitch. And I believe the horrifying way that these rules were written is entirely the culprit in all of this confusion.

I believe the intent of the rules makers was:
A) To absolve the pitcher of any balk caused by a batter stepping out;
B) To create a penalty of 1 strike for the batter's actions - regardless of whether the ball was pitched or not, and regardless of whether the ball was pitched well (in or out of the strike zone).

This makes sense, and is coherent.

Then the rule came out.

Then someone else entirely read it strangely and wrote bizarre cases to create this 2-strike on 1 pitch nonsense.

There were a lot of bizarre interps during a certain Rules Editor's tenure, many of which were ignored by working umpires. Fortunately, most have been addressed and corrected.

I don't think that's accurate, but it gets the point across.