Bunt

UMP25

fitump56 wrote
Originally Posted by fitump56
I'm on with this interp. Placing the bat over the plate..

1) Trying to adjust the D (as in feint and hit) - good baseball.
2) Trying to distract F1/F2 - guess who else gets distracted, PU, you think this is good?

If you have your bat anywhere near the pitch when it comes in, Steeeeeerikorino.

Go to bed. Surely you have better things to do than nitpik my posts.

OK, I'm still up. I'll just finish where Bob left off. 🙂

BTW, how far (close?) is "anywhere near"? If the bat is 6" away, do we strike the pitch? So 2.00 definition of a strike is moot here?

Wow! My games are all gonna be less than hour now with this and Mueller's Rules of Unofficial "Baseball!" 🙄

SanDiegoSteve

For those who side with Fittysix and Mueller, remember this: A pitch that is not struck at and not in the strike zone is a ball.

That is all you need to remember.

UMP25

Silly, Steve, you're forgetting that that is correct in OBR and not UOBR, hich seems to be the code f56 and Mueller are following.

MrUmpire

Don Mueller wrote
In other words, if the batter shows zero attempt to pull back, I'll probably see an attempt.

In other words, if the batter follows the rules, you won't.

fitump56

MrUmpire wrote
In other words, if the batter follows the rules, you won't.

When every batter does, he will.

Your turn.

fitump56

SanDiegoSteve wrote
For those who side with Fittysix and Mueller, remember this: A pitch that is not struck at and not in the strike zone is a ball.

Excellent. I got one of those things too.

"AN IDIOT WHO LEAVES HIS BAT TO BUNT at our near the plate IS ASSUMED TO BE STRIKING THE BASEBALL ....

bob jenkins

fitump56 wrote
SanDiegoSteve wrote
For those who side with Fittysix and Mueller, remember this: A pitch that is not struck at and not in the strike zone is a ball.

Excellent. I got one of those things too.

"AN IDIOT WHO LEAVES HIS BAT TO BUNT at our near the plate IS ASSUMED TO BE STRIKING THE BASEBALL ....

Fed 7.2.1B "In bunting, any movement of the bat toward the ball when the ball is over or near the plate area, is a strike. The mere holding of the bat in the strike zone is not an attempt to hit the ball."

SanDiegoSteve

bob jenkins wrote
Fed 7.2.1B "In bunting, any movement of the bat toward the ball when the ball is over or near the plate area, is a strike. The mere holding of the bat in the strike zone is not an attempt to hit the ball."

Bob, I know I have seen it somewhere, but isn't there an OBR version of this statement? I scoured my rule book looking for it and can't find it. Perhaps you can tell me exactly where I've seen this interpretation. Is it in a manual somewhere?

Don Mueller

bob jenkins wrote
fitump56 wrote
SanDiegoSteve wrote
For those who side with Fittysix and Mueller, remember this: A pitch that is not struck at and not in the strike zone is a ball.

Fed 7.2.1B "In bunting, any movement of the bat toward the ball when the ball is over or near the plate area, is a strike. The mere holding of the bat in the strike zone is not an attempt to hit the ball."

Thanks Bob,

For those who have been denegrating my posts please reread posts 8 and 11 without prejudice and tell me how I've bent, misapplied or made up additional rules relative to this topic.
My interps on the above rule were right on, if I do say so myself.
I think some on this forum are so prejudice it blinds them from understanding basic principles of a post.
I wonder if those who prejudge posts also prejudge plays on the field?

fitump56

bob jenkins wrote
fitump56 wrote
SanDiegoSteve wrote
For those who side with Fittysix and Mueller, remember this: A pitch that is not struck at and not in the strike zone is a ball.

Fed 7.2.1B "In bunting, any movement of the bat toward the ball when the ball is over or near the plate area, is a strike. The mere holding of the bat in the strike zone is not an attempt to hit the ball."

So if B vertically raises his bat to, let's say, shoulder height on a an inside drop curve, that breaks slightly off the plate but well below his bat, he gets a "Ball"? 😮 I guess so. 😕

What if he holds the bat on the same pitch, outside the strike zone, again not "to" the ball, because it is outside the strike zone, he gets a "Ball"? 😀

How much bat = bat? All, part the tip end?

Ill defined rules of OBR, which ought to be tossed into the garbage and totally rewritten anyway, need common sense interps. Here's mine.

"AN IDIOT WHO LEAVES HIS BAT TO BUNT at our near the plate IS ASSUMED TO BE STRIKING THE BASEBALL ....as far as I am concerned. Since I have nor will never see a B who holds a bat completely still and in accordance with above BS rule, I got strikes to call.

waltjp

Don Mueller wrote
Thanks Bob,

For those who have been denegrating my posts please reread posts 8 and 11 without prejudice and tell me how I've bent, misapplied or made up additional rules relative to this topic.
My interps on the above rule were right on, if I do say so myself.
I think some on this forum are so prejudice it blinds them from understanding basic principles of a post.
I wonder if those who prejudge posts also prejudge plays on the field?

The rule:

Fed 7.2.1B "In bunting, any movement of the bat toward the ball when the ball is over or near the plate area, is a strike. The mere holding of the bat in the strike zone is not an attempt to hit the ball."

From Post 8

Don Mueller wrote
In other words, if the batter shows zero attempt to pull back, I'll probably see an attempt.

From Post 11

Don Mueller wrote
All I'm saying is that I rarely see a batter who is too lazy to pull the bat back also be able to remain motionless.

What you're saying is you're going to disregard the part of the rule that states, "The mere holding of the bat in the strike zone is not an attempt to hit the ball" and you're going to rule - no, wait... judge this as an attempt. I think we all hear you loud and clear.

NFump

waltjp wrote
The rule:

From Post 8

From Post 11

What you're saying is you're going to disregard the part of the rule that states, "The mere holding of the bat in the strike zone is not an attempt to hit the ball" and you're going to rule - no, wait... judge this as an attempt. I think we all hear you loud and clear.

That would appear to be correct, walt.

Don Mueller

waltjp wrote
The rule:

From Post 8

Are you incapable of putting this statement in context with the rest of the post?

waltjp wrote
From Post 11

What you're saying is you're going to disregard the part of the rule that states, "The mere holding of the bat in the strike zone is not an attempt to hit the ball"

Show me one statement in context that says that.

waltjp wrote
and you're going to rule - no, wait... judge this as an attempt. I think we all hear you loud and clear.

Either you have a severe problem with comprehension and understanding the written word or you're so prejudice you can't read straight.
which is it?

NFump

Nah, he got it right. You're trying to get away with calling it "judgement". Nice try.

UMP25

fitump56 wrote
bob jenkins wrote
fitump56 wrote
"AN IDIOT WHO LEAVES HIS BAT TO BUNT at our near the plate IS ASSUMED TO BE STRIKING THE BASEBALL ....as far as I am concerned.

🙄 🙄 🙄

Not as far as I'm concerned, that's for sure. For one thing, I actually know what the definition of a bunt is--and it's different from a swing. Unless he's actually making an attempt to push the bat forward when the ball passes the bat, I've got a ball and not a strike. That, in fact, is the ruling, and not the UOBR interpretation some here seem to believe.

Of course, we all know what happens when we try to @ssume...

SanDiegoSteve

SanDiegoSteve wrote
Bob, I know I have seen it somewhere, but isn't there an OBR version of this statement? I scoured my rule book looking for it and can't find it. Perhaps you can tell me exactly where I've seen this interpretation. Is it in a manual somewhere?

Can someone please answer this question? It's bugging me. I'm sure I've seen it in OBR somewhere but I just can't find it.

fitump56

UMP25 wrote
Unless he's actually making an attempt to push the bat forward when the ball passes the bat, I've got a ball and not a strike.

Forward is it? Not what the rule says, the rule says "at" the ball. So you would not call a strike if B drops or raises his bat vertically with no forward push if the ball is above or below his bat, in an obvious attempt to bunt? I guess not. 😮

waltjp

Don Mueller wrote
Either you have a severe problem with comprehension and understanding the written word or you're so prejudice you can't read straight.
which is it?

Okay, Don. I'll play along. Let's suspend reality for a moment and assume that my comprehension skills are deficient. Go ahead and put your statements in terms that I can understand.

Make it succinct, because between what you've written in this thread and what you've said in the OBS thread you don't appear to have a lot of credibility.

Don Mueller

waltjp wrote
Okay, Don. I'll play along. Let's suspend reality for a moment and assume that my comprehension skills are deficient. Go ahead and put your statements in terms that I can understand.

Make it succinct, because between what you've written in this thread and what you've said in the OBS thread you don't appear to have a lot of credibility.

Simply put:

It is very difficult to remain motionless when squared to bunt.
If there is any movement forward or toward the ball I will strike it.
The benefit of doubt will certainly be in favor of F1.
If the batter makes no attempt to pull back I will look hard for an attempt.
You may not like that attitude but it is within the rules.
My op was a heads up to flemmer (I figured he was a coach) and other coaches that to teach kids to keep the bat over the plate, for whatever reason, may not be a good idea.
I was not trying to talk you out of giving up strikes.

bob jenkins

Don Mueller wrote
If the batter makes no attempt to pull back I will look hard for an attempt.

I disagree with this statement. (Okay, to be clear, I don't disagree that Don does it; I disagree that he, or any umpire, should do it).

An umpire needn't "look hard" for an attempt. He just needs to watch the actions and judge accordingly.

« Previous Page Next Page »