New rule I learned from a coach today...

[Dakota]

NFHS. If a batter gets hit by a pitch while out of the batter's box (even if out of the box because she is trying to avoid getting hit by the pitch), it is a dead ball and a ball on the batter.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Damn good rule, too, I say!!

[Andy]

Originally Posted by Dakota

NFHS. If a batter gets hit by a pitch while out of the batter's box (even if out of the box because she is trying to avoid getting hit by the pitch), it is a dead ball and a ball on the batter.

I've heard this one as well....almost had to eject a coach over it....

[BEAREF]

Originally Posted by Dakota

NFHS. If a batter gets hit by a pitch while out of the batter's box (even if out of the box because she is trying to avoid getting hit by the pitch), it is a dead ball and a ball on the batter.

I've had a coach tell me that it couldn't be a hit by pitch because the ball bounced before it hit the batter and that the ball should be dead.

[chapmaja]

I had a coach tell me yesterday that it wasn't a hit by pitch because the batter never tried getting out of the way (which she did not). I told him when the ball is completely in the batters box she doesn't need to try avoiding being hit. He disagreed and doesn't believe they changed the rule several years ago. The batter just stood there as the ball bounced into her leg as she was in the back of the batters box.

This was the same coach who didn't agree with a strike call on a bunt attempt. The batter left the bat straight across the plate when the pitch was over the catchers head. Even the batter knew it was a strike.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

This was the same coach who didn't agree with a strike call on a bunt attempt. The batter left the bat straight across the plate when the pitch was over the catchers head. Even the batter knew it was a strike.

That is why this is a stupid rule.

[Crabby_Bob]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

That is why this is a stupid rule.

Made even more stupid because the bat doesn't have to be over the plate.

OB new rule: both of the batter's feet have to be out of the box for the batter to be out of the box.

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by Crabby_Bob

Made even more stupid because the bat doesn't have to be over the plate.

That's what rubs me the wrong way about this rule (well, one of things that does...).

According to the written rule, the bat DOES need to be over the plate. It says that "holding the bat in the strike zone is considered a bunt attempt". Last time I checked, the strike zone was over the plate.

And what if...the batter squares to bunt, but holds the bat across the plate at chin level (or anywhere higher than the armpits). Is that "holding the bat in the strike zone"? Not my strike zone! (Unless it's been a really long, boring, middle school game ).

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by BretMan

That's what rubs me the wrong way about this rule (well, one of things that does...).

According to the written rule, the bat DOES need to be over the plate. It says that "holding the bat in the strike zone is considered a bunt attempt". Last time I checked, the strike zone was over the plate.

And what if...the batter squares to bunt, but holds the bat across the plate at chin level (or anywhere higher than the armpits). Is that "holding the bat in the strike zone"? Not my strike zone! (Unless it's been a really long, boring, middle school game ).

The funny thing about that strike call was that if the bat had been over the plate at chin level she would have been offering at the pitch which was over the catchers head.

I love the cases when the players know the up is right but the coach wants to disagree.