Batter throws bat

[metroump9]

The hit/bunt and run is on and the defense calls a pitch out. The pitch is so far outside the batter throws his bat to hit the ball to protect the runner. (A) Doesn't make contact with the ball. (B) Makes contact with the ball. Is it legal to throw your bat at the ball?

[jicecone]

I am not aware of a rule that says it is legal however, I am also not aware of a rule that says it is illegal either.

If a battter swings at a pitch and the bat slips out of his hands, are they throwing the bat?

Unless you can prove that it was done maliciously and created an unsafe condition. Don't go there.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by metroump9

The hit/bunt and run is on and the defense calls a pitch out. The pitch is so far outside the batter throws his bat to hit the ball to protect the runner. (A) Doesn't make contact with the ball. (B) Makes contact with the ball. Is it legal to throw your bat at the ball?

Yes, it is legal.

[MD Longhorn]

Throwing the bat in anger is wrong. Throwing it carelessly is wrong. Throwing it to distract a fielder is wrong.

Throwing it to try to hit the ball is completely legal, whether you make contact or not. Nothing wrong in this play.

[metroump9]

Any rule book reference or case book play? NFHS

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by metroump9

Any rule book reference or case book play? NFHS

Looking for a rulebook reference for something that is not against the rules is usually hopeless. There might be a caseplay, but I don't see one in the two books I have handy.

(And if you're wondering where there wouldn't be a rule that states this is legal ... is there a rule that says the pitcher may throw the ball such that it curves on it's way to the batter? Nope... cause it's legal. Generally - if something is not stated as illegal, it's legal.)

[jicecone]

Sometimes you just have to umpire!

[Manny A]

Agree. There is no requirement whatsoever in any rule book that the bat remain in the batter's hands in order to hit the ball. The only stipulation is that the batter cannot have one foot completely out of the batter's box and on the ground when contact between the ball and bat takes place. If contact takes place, then you would rule Fair or Foul. Otherwise, it's a Strike.

[DG]

I think I would rule (A) strike and (B) depends on what the struck ball does.

[Manny A]

As a follow-on, suppose on the pitch-out, the catcher moves out and up, and the batter tosses his bat to try and hit the ball. But he ends up hitting the catcher instead.

Do you have batter interference, or catcher interference/obstruction here?

[scrounge]

Originally Posted by Manny A

As a follow-on, suppose on the pitch-out, the catcher moves out and up, and the batter tosses his bat to try and hit the ball. But he ends up hitting the catcher instead.

Do you have batter interference, or catcher interference/obstruction here?

I'd say you could certainly make a case for BI if it interferes with a play. At a minimum I would definitely issue a team warning for carelessly throwing a bat under 3.3.1 with the next offender ejected.

[dash_riprock]

Now there's a new one - hitting the catcher with an intentionally thrown bat!

I think I'd have INT on the batter. You'd have to be out of your mind to call anything on the catcher.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by scrounge

I'd say you could certainly make a case for BI if it interferes with a play. At a minimum I would definitely issue a team warning for carelessly throwing a bat under 3.3.1 with the next offender ejected.

Please don't.

Intentionally throwing a bat is quite the opposite from carelessly throwing a bat. If he's trying to hit the ball (your call), then he's trying to hit the ball - and doing nothing illegal (and certainly not careless). Warning someone for doing something they are allowed to do is completely inappropriate.

If he hits the catcher, well, as they say, sometimes you just have to umpire. If he's legitimately trying to hit the ball (again ... in MY opinion), then I've got nothing but a strike. If he's trying to make things messy for the catcher, that's a completely different thing.

[Rich Ives]

Int? On the batter? Really? Why?

It's a pitch. The batter has an irrevocable right to attempt to hit it as long as he/she remains in a legal hitting position. If the catcher gets in the way of the attempt it's CI/CO.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

It's a pitch. The batter has an irrevocable right to attempt to hit it as long as he/she remains in a legal hitting position. If the catcher gets in the way of the attempt it's CI/CO.

Any batter can easily club the catcher while remaining in the batter's box. I hope you're not calling CI on that.

This is something that is not contemplated by the rules. The closest thing I can find is 6.05(h) Comment (even if the catcher is hit in foul territory).

You could also call it weak INT - add a strike and return the runners.