Batter hit by pitch while swinging

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by kennyc1

Was he correct saying on strikes 1 and 2 that the ball is dead if striking the batter?

On strike 3, without being hit by the ball, the ball is live. His question is, if struck by the ball on strike 3, is the ball live or not?

Your rhetorical question offered no insight or answer to his question. I don't know the answer either.



Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

If the poster knows it was a dead ball strike on strike one and two, and thus that it's a strike, why is he asking if on strike three if the batter is out.

Learn to think things through. In doing so the poster discovers the answer through the challenge.

Teach a man to fish.

[kennyc1]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

If the poster knows it was a dead ball strike on strike one and two, and thus that it's a strike, why is he asking if on strike three if the batter is out.

Learn to think things through. In doing so the poster discovers the answer through the challenge.

Teach a man to fish.

I would love to be able to apply logic to interpret baseball/softball rules, but it never seems to work. In this case, it did. I waiting to hear some crazy reason why it was a live ball on strike 3.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

[youngump]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

If the poster knows it was a dead ball strike on strike one and two, and thus that it's a strike, why is he asking if on strike three if the batter is out.

Learn to think things through. In doing so the poster discovers the answer through the challenge.

Teach a man to fish.

I'm not at all opposed to this general approach but in this particular case I think your reasoning is subtly wrong. There is a rule to cover this situation and there needs to be. If not just following where you're pointing, you have a problem if first base is open or two are out because strike three was uncaught.

[dlsumpntx]

Uncaught yes, but also a dead ball.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by dlsumpntx

Uncaught yes, but also a dead ball.

Yes, which is why you need a special rule because the BR cannot advance but the catcher can't pick up the ball and tag her either.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by youngump

Yes, which is why you need a special rule because the BR cannot advance but the catcher can't pick up the ball and tag her either.

No, you don't need a special rule. A dead ball is a dead ball. What can happen during a dead ball?

[youngump]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

No, you don't need a special rule. A dead ball is a dead ball. What can happen during a dead ball?

A runner can be called out on appeal for failing to touch second and her coach can be tossed for arguing about it. Neither is particularly relevant here. I'm not sure what you're trying to argue. If there wasn't a rule making the batter on a dead ball strike 3, she wouldn't be out, she'd be entitled to advance with liability to be put out which would be awkward with the ball being dead.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by youngump

A runner can be called out on appeal for failing to touch second and her coach can be tossed for arguing about it. Neither is particularly relevant here. I'm not sure what you're trying to argue. If there wasn't a rule making the batter on a dead ball strike 3, she wouldn't be out, she'd be entitled to advance with liability to be put out which would be awkward with the ball being dead.

You are right, irrelevant.

And she would be out. The strike comes first, the contact with the batter second. Always has been dating back to the 1930s

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by youngump

I'm not at all opposed to this general approach but in this particular case I think your reasoning is subtly wrong. There is a rule to cover this situation and there needs to be. If not just following where you're pointing, you have a problem if first base is open or two are out because strike three was uncaught.

Doesn't matter. It's dead because it hit the batter.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

Doesn't matter. It's dead because it hit the batter.

Yes, and the batter's out because there's a rule that says she is.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by youngump

Yes, and the batter's out because there's a rule that says she is.

Actually, the rule only recognizes a strike. The batter is out if it is strike 3, nothing to do with the batter being hit by the ball.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Actually, the rule only recognizes a strike. The batter is out if it is strike 3, nothing to do with the batter being hit by the ball.

I don't have my current book with me. I do have a pdf copy of the rules from 2005 so that's what I'll cite; I don't think any of this has changed.

Rule 7-6-A is the relevant reference there. It clearly states that the batter is out if hit by strike 3 in the strike zone or if hit by strike 3 while swinging at it.

This discussion is about what would happen if you deleted that rule. 7-6-M doesn't apply because the catcher didn't catch the ball. So how do you get the out?

It would be possible to rewrite the rules with a notation that a batter who got three strikes was out with an exception for U3K but that's not how they read.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by youngump

I don't have my current book with me. I do have a pdf copy of the rules from 2005 so that's what I'll cite; I don't think any of this has changed.

Rule 7-6-A is the relevant reference there. It clearly states that the batter is out if hit by strike 3 in the strike zone or if hit by strike 3 while swinging at it.

This discussion is about what would happen if you deleted that rule. 7-6-M doesn't apply because the catcher didn't catch the ball. So how do you get the out?

It would be possible to rewrite the rules with a notation that a batter who got three strikes was out with an exception for U3K but that's not how they read.

It is the third strike that makes the batter out whether it hits him/her or not. The rule you are citing is a redundancy. But I stand corrected you are right it is in the book. Why I have no idea. Probably for the same dummies that believe the IF rule is written properly citing 1st & 2nd or 1st, 2nd & 3rd as qualifiers.

7-4-H & Effect