NFHS - pitched ball hits plate

[CLBuffalo]

Just wondering if anyone knows why it is automatically a ball if a pitched ball hits the plate and is not swung at in NFHS fastpitch. I can't find this in other organzations' fastpitch rules.

[MNBlue]

Are you certain you're not looking at a slow pitch exception in the softball rule book?

[U of M Sam]

Chester - my response from the other forum where you posted:

NFHS rule: 7-2 ART. 1: A strike is charged to the batter when:
a. a pitched ball enters any part of the strike zone in flight and is not struck at.
EFFECT: Any pitch that touches the plate shall be called a ball if the batter does not strike at it. (Page 57 / 2006 NFHS rules book)

Little League rules. (2.00 Definition of Terms)
A STRIKE is a legal pitch which meets any of these conditions -
(b) Is not struck at, if any part of the ball passes through any part of the strike zone (page 51 / LL rules book)

I always understood that in FP softball if the pitch hits the plate (and batter does not swing) it cannot be called a strike because it did not "pass through" the strike zone.

Hope this helps

[ June 11, 2006, 09:37 PM: Message edited by: U of M Sam ]

--------------------
Sam

[CLBuffalo]

MNBlue

Are you certain you're not looking at a slow pitch exception in the softball rule book?

Yes I am sure. I was referring to the rule cited by U of M Sam.

There was a long discussion about this either here or the other forum about this. If an FP pitcher throws an ephus or high arc pitch it is possible for the ball to pass through the strike zone and then hit the plate.

I was just wanted to know if anyone had any idea about the rationale for even having this EFFECT in the NFHS rules. As I stated before I can not find this rule in any other rules set.

[SC Ump]

Originally Posted by CLBuffalo

I was just wanted to know if anyone had any idea about the rationale for even having this EFFECT in the NFHS rules. As I stated before I can not find this rule in any other rules set.

Are you implying that it is "rational" for the rule to be in slowpitch? I've never thought so. But either way, I don't know the rationale for many of the rules.

Note that the rule is the same in fastpitch for ASA (7-5-A) and NSA (7-8-a, FP).

[AtlUmpSteve]

It is very possible for a pitch with arc to cross a point at the knees at the front of the plate, and then hit the plate. And, contrary to what has been suggested by other posters, if a ball had enough arc to hit the knees at the front of the plate, crossed the corner, and landed NEXT TO THE PLATE without traveling all 40', it is by definition a strike, and can and should be called one.

So, why isn't it a strike? More than several years ago I posed that question relative to ASA slow pitch to Merle Butler (then National Director of Umpires for ASA) and Henry Pollard (then National Deputy Director of Umpires). It was IMMEDIATELY conceded that, without that added statement, a pitch absolutely could cross the strike zone and hit the plate. The reason ASA adopted the "cannot hit the plate" rule in slow pitch was to create a higher level of consistency in umpires calling balls and strikes; they basically "dummied down" the rule, since so many umpires really weren't effectively judging the arc in slow pitch. At least this way, they made the front of the zone consistent throughout the country.

ASA Fast pitch added the same phrase. While still physically possible to have a strike hit the plate, if it isn't a strike in slow pitch (pitching with an arc), it shouldn't be a strike in fast pitch. That's the philosophy.

For many years (WMB could possibly define the time; I believe just within the past few years, actually) NFHS did NOT have that language in fast pitch. Never treated as a rule change, I believe it was added as an editorial change without fanfare, possibly 2002'ish. But, it follows the mainstream thought process; not a strike in slow pitch to create a consistent point, not a strike in fast pitch because it isn't a strike in slow pitch.

[CLBuffalo]

Thank you very much AtlUmpSteve. That explains it for me.

To all the other respondents thanks for your input. I would like to emphasize that I do NOT call it a strike if it hits the plate without being swung at. I just wanted the reasoning.