Batter throws bat

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by scrounge

Attempting to hit a pitch with a thrown bat that hits someone (assuming it's not CI), while not unintentional, could be reasonably argued to be negligent IMO.

Using your logic, a runner who takes out a pivot man on the DP by sliding into him while still being able to reach the base with his hand would be negligent. But guess what? It is perfectly legal.

There is no rule (in OBR) that requires the runner to slide directly into the base, just like there is no rule that requires the batter to maintain control of his bat to hit the ball. His chances of contacting the ball with a released bat makes the tactic unwise, but not negligent.

[scrounge]

Originally Posted by Manny A

Using your logic, a runner who takes out a pivot man on the DP by sliding into him while still being able to reach the base with his hand would be negligent. But guess what? It is perfectly legal.

There is no rule (in OBR) that requires the runner to slide directly into the base, just like there is no rule that requires the batter to maintain control of his bat to hit the ball. His chances of contacting the ball with a released bat makes the tactic unwise, but not negligent.

Well, there is in FED, in both cases. I'd say 95% of my games are FED, so that's my default. And I'm not saying just throwing the bat is automatically careless, but if it hits the catcher I can easily see how it could be careless and negligent. It also might not be, but I'm not about to say it can't be.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by scrounge

Well, there is in FED, in both cases. I'd say 95% of my games are FED, so that's my default. And I'm not saying just throwing the bat is automatically careless, but if it hits the catcher I can easily see how it could be careless and negligent. It also might not be, but I'm not about to say it can't be.

Throwing the bat with a purpose - any purpose - is the complete opposite to throwing it carelessly. If he threw the bat on purpose - and it hits the catcher - you either have BI or CO. Period. In the case of BI, you might possibly also have something worse.

[Rich Ives]

Another case of "This is stupid and/or I don't like it. I'm going to find a reason to punish it".

[scrounge]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

Another case of "This is stupid and/or I don't like it. I'm going to find a reason to punish it".

Not at all, this is a clear and present safety issue. Careless does NOT solely mean unintentional...at least not to me. I respect the other opinions but I disagree.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by scrounge

Not at all, this is a clear and present safety issue. Careless does NOT solely mean unintentional...at least not to me. I respect the other opinions but I disagree.

Perhaps. But our opinions are based upon the rules as written, and there is nothing in those rules that prohibits a batter from attempting to hit a pitched ball with his bat, no matter where it goes. Some rule sets address carelessly released bats, which happens after the batter hits or misses the pitch, and results in bats flying out of control in any direction. That's not what happens when a batter purposefully tosses his bat towards a pitch in order to make contact.

You really have to be careful when you put safety above the written rules. The game is inherently unsafe to begin with. Umpires who start coming up with rulings based upon safety, such as requiring a pitcher to be removed from the mound after hitting so many batters, set themselves up for problems.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by Manny A

Some rule sets address carelessly released bats, which happens after the batter hits or misses the pitch, and results in bats flying out of control in any direction. That's not what happens when a batter purposefully tosses his bat towards a pitch in order to make contact.

Throwing a bat at a pitch in order to hit it does not make the batter immune from INT.

[scrounge]

Originally Posted by Manny A

Perhaps. But our opinions are based upon the rules as written, and there is nothing in those rules that prohibits a batter from attempting to hit a pitched ball with his bat, no matter where it goes. Some rule sets address carelessly released bats, which happens after the batter hits or misses the pitch, and results in bats flying out of control in any direction. That's not what happens when a batter purposefully tosses his bat towards a pitch in order to make contact.

You really have to be careful when you put safety above the written rules. The game is inherently unsafe to begin with. Umpires who start coming up with rulings based upon safety, such as requiring a pitcher to be removed from the mound after hitting so many batters, set themselves up for problems.

I agree with your second paragraph - but I disagree that that's what I'm doing. I do not agree that trying to hit a pitch and carelessly releasing a bat are mutually exclusive, nor do the rules make that distinction. Depends how that batter purposefully tosses that bat to make contact. I'm saying that act could be careless. Not necessarily would, but certainly could be. That meets the spirit AND letter of the rules.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

Another case of "This is stupid and/or I don't like it. I'm going to find a reason to punish it".

I think it's just as stupid to punish the catcher for getting hit with a thrown bat. If he's in front of the plate, well that's something completely different.

You have to see it to remedy it, if a remedy is needed at all.