Sleepless night in Texas

The other night a partner and I were talking about one of my earlier post "Protest" and got into this discussion in which we agreed to disagree. The partner has 20+ years experience on me and have always had smooth running games when I have worked with him but here is what we disagreed on

SIT: B1 at bat PU gaves 2 balls 1 strike count verbally when the proper count was 2 balls 2 strikes B1 takes next pitch which is a strike and which PU is quickly corrected by the defensive team that this is strike 3.

MY VIEW: Batter out PU errored and will hear it from the offensive team but batter also has responibilty to know the proper count next batter up

PARTNERS VIEW:PU put the batter in jeopardy when he gave the wrong count out verbally should stay with the 2 balls 1 strike count given, now the count is 2 & 2 play on take the heat from the defensive side


What you think guys

Don

hmmm
 

I can see both points of view on this.. but I feel that the batter should be out.. just like you said.. the batter should always know the count.. but I can see where each and every umpire may view this differently..

Don,
You're possibly both right on this one - though I tend to agree much more with your position that both offense and defense are responsible for knowing count & outs & all regardless of any wrong info the umpire gives. In ASA ball, Casebook Play 10.6-4 reads:
"(FP only) Runner R3 on 2B, batter has 1-ball,1-strike count, with 2 outs. The plate umpire calls the next pitch a strike, pumping the thrid strike. R3 steps off the base and is tagged out by a defensive player. Even though the umpire was in error with the third strike(should have been only second strike), both R3 and coaches should be aware of the count and outs.
RULING:
If the umpires think that the signal placed the runner in jeopardy, then the result should be reversed. (10-6-C)"

So, in your example, I have strike 3 & an out. PU's error didn't change anything. In the book's example, fix that, umpire's error caused the runner to step off the base.

For another example, I was uic at a state championship and got called into this one. Team A wanted to re-enter a starter in a different batting position. Umpire allowed it - call it a brain fart or something - later on, Team B points out illegal re-entry. Team A's response was that PU allowed it to take place. Team A ended up being unhappy with the decision that they were responsible for their lineup. While preventative umpiring would have prevented their problem, it was still their problem.

10-6-C is umpire's judgment
 

Assume the 3rd strike just caught the outside edge.

Suppose your situation was in a 10U game - unlikely that the batter made a different decision on the pitch because she had one more strike to give. Batter out.

Suppose your situation was in a 18U tournament finals with a skilled batter up. Here it is possible, likely even, that the batter passed up on this one hoping the next pitch would be more to her liking. Tough umpire judgment call here - I can see applying 10-6-C and taking the heat from the defense.

(YIPPEE! This post was the 1000th post on "our" softball board! Hey, eUmpire, what is my prize??? :D)

[Edited by Dakota on May 3rd, 2001 at 09:47 AM]

Dakota,
I can't see ever letting a batter get a "fourth" strike in a situation like this. Batter, more than anyone except maybe pitcher & catcher, had better know what's going on. I can't speak for any age groups under the 14&U/JV since I don't do those games - too tough to get into position while working the plate.

Why didn't you call time and resolve the count before you had a problem?

Bob

10-6-C not a miracle cure
 

I think some folks are giving 10-6-C too much power (similar to 9.01c in baseball).

10-6-C says that the plate umpire may rectify any situation in which <b>an a reversal of an umpire's decision or a delayed call</b> places a batter-runner, a runner, or the defensive team in jeopardy.

I don't see where giving an incorrect count quailfies as either a reversal or a delayed decision. Unless you say that he "reversed" his decision that strike 2 was really strike 3 but that is too much of a stretch for me.

I have the batter out.

Re: 10-6-C not a miracle cure
 

Good point... read the rule carefully; don't add to it, etc. etc.

My initial reaction to the first post was something like, "Don't be silly. Of course you correct the count & batter out." Then I started thinking about a batter's decision-making on choosing pitches to swing at, etc. Now, I'm back to my original thought - batter out. Sometimes I think too much!

Bob,
I may be giving myself a "kiss of death" with this, but this is one I haven't had yet. But if I know that I have given wrong info, I will correct it.

Steve:

I don't know how my post looked like a response to your's. I meant to respond to the original post.

Bob

yes Bob
 

The correct thing would alway be to correct the count if brought to your attention before the pitch the question was a discussion between two umps on a what if and it was not corrected until after the 3rd strike was thrown


Don