The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 16, 2007, 09:45am
Al Al is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 207
Send a message via Yahoo to Al
Quote:
Originally Posted by UMP 64
The batter should have received a strike call. A batter cannot swing more than one time at one pitch. Dead ball, Strike.
I agree and think an umpire should immediately give a loud and clear strike call upon the first swing to any batter who does that. And if she still swings a second time and makes contact as she did in the OP following that loud and clear strike call everyone should clearly understand why the dead ball was called on contact. .. Al
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 16, 2007, 09:49am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: N.KY
Posts: 87
Thumbs up double swing?????

Good call AL.
__________________
UMP64

Thoes who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 16, 2007, 10:04am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawk65
She is intentionally swinging very early with no intent to hit the ball at this point.
Quote:
NFHS Rule Book
Rule 2: Definitions
Section 56: Strike, Strikeout, Strike Zone
Art. 1... Strike. A strike is any pitch that ...is swung at by the batter and missed.

Rule 7: Batting
Section 2: Strikes, Balls And Hits
Art. 1... A strike is charged to the batter when:
b. a pitched ball is struck at and missed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al
I ... think an umpire should immediately give a loud and clear strike call upon the first swing to any batter who does that.
__________________
Tom
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 16, 2007, 10:14am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Little Elm, TX (NW Dallas)
Posts: 4,047
Bringing the bat through the strikezone with no intent to hit the ball is not a strike. Nothing illegal about this sitch, and it's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be allowed.
__________________
"Many baseball fans look upon an umpire as a sort of necessary evil to the luxury of baseball, like the odor that follows an automobile." - Hall of Fame Pitcher Christy Mathewson
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 16, 2007, 10:25am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Plymouth, MN
Posts: 741
Send a message via Yahoo to MNBlue
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrowder
Bringing the bat through the strikezone with no intent to hit the ball is not a strike. Nothing illegal about this sitch, and it's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be allowed.
I agree with you Mike, BUT, what about this act. R1 on first, stealing with the pitch. Batter swings on the release of the pitch, absolutely no intent to hit the ball, she's just trying to protect the runner. I have seen this happen often and it is always called a strike. I think trying to sell a no strike to the DC would be nearly impossible.
__________________
Mark

NFHS, NCAA, NAFA
"If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?" Anton Chigurh - "No Country for Old Men"
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 16, 2007, 10:42am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Little Elm, TX (NW Dallas)
Posts: 4,047
Quote:
Originally Posted by MNBlue
I agree with you Mike, BUT, what about this act. R1 on first, stealing with the pitch. Batter swings on the release of the pitch, absolutely no intent to hit the ball, she's just trying to protect the runner. I have seen this happen often and it is always called a strike. I think trying to sell a no strike to the DC would be nearly impossible.
Very different sitch. If the swinging of the bat is somewhat near the timing of the ball coming through, you're probably just ruling a strike.

If you truly feel that there was no attempt to hit the ball at all, and only an attempt to interfere .... don't you think that is not a strike, but rather interference?
__________________
"Many baseball fans look upon an umpire as a sort of necessary evil to the luxury of baseball, like the odor that follows an automobile." - Hall of Fame Pitcher Christy Mathewson
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 16, 2007, 11:03am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Please do not tell me that you would rule INT just because a batter moved the bat without trying to hit the ball.

I guess the next part of this thread will move to the "waving" of the bat at the plate to protect a stealing runner.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 16, 2007, 12:12pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA
Please do not tell me that you would rule INT just because a batter moved the bat without trying to hit the ball.

I guess the next part of this thread will move to the "waving" of the bat at the plate to protect a stealing runner.
Well, I gotta call sumthin' since, well, I just don't like it!

__________________
Tom
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 16, 2007, 12:26pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Little Elm, TX (NW Dallas)
Posts: 4,047
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA
Please do not tell me that you would rule INT just because a batter moved the bat without trying to hit the ball.

I guess the next part of this thread will move to the "waving" of the bat at the plate to protect a stealing runner.
Maybe you misunderstood me.

What I mean here is that any such swing designed to protect the runner which remotely coincides with the pitch should be interpreted as an attempt to hit the pitch. The OP's first "swing" was not anywhere near the time the ball crossed the plate, and should not be ruled as an attempt to hit the ball (and based on your first response, I think you agree with that). THIS sitch should be ruled an attempt to hit the ball. Only if the timing of the swing was so far apart from the timing of the pitch that it's only purpose could be to interfere, then it's interference. The "intent" here, for want of a better word, had better be crystal clear if you're going to rule no-strike, interference.
__________________
"Many baseball fans look upon an umpire as a sort of necessary evil to the luxury of baseball, like the odor that follows an automobile." - Hall of Fame Pitcher Christy Mathewson
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 16, 2007, 03:08pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 306
Swing and a miss -- Strike, hitting the ball on the follow through -- dead ball! While this is a remarkable bit of swinging it is not a hit. If she would have missed on the second time though would you have called strike two? I saw that in a Bugs Bunny cartoon once. Struck out the side on one pitch.

Bugg
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 17, 2007, 08:54am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 81
BuggBob is absolutely correct. This would be a strike and dead ball (foul).

Dakota was right with the definitions but his explanations are wrong.

There's nothing in the rulebook of that states the batter has to attempt to hit the ball in order for a pitch to be ruled a strike. What would be the call if a batter swings late (after the catcher has already caught the ball) and the pitch was not in the strike zone? That's a strike in my book.

The NCAA and NFHS made interpretations regarding this exact play a few years ago. The batter can only swing at a pitch one time. Contact with the ball by the bat after the first swing is considered a foul ball.

I know, MCROWDER will disagree, but intent is not a factor.

Using the definitions of a strike: "any pitch ... that is swung at by the batter and missed" and when a pitch starts: "when one hand is taken off the ball or the pitcher makes any motion that is part of the windup...", it is clear that the ruling on this play is a strike and foul ball.

Hopefully, you naysayers will own up to the fact that you are wrong this time.
__________________
Don't be afraid to try new things.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 17, 2007, 02:12pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: N.KY
Posts: 87
Double swing

Still a strike. If the swing was made to "protect the runner" then you have batters INT/F, batter is out, runner goes back to preveious base or third out!
__________________
UMP64

Thoes who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it!
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 18, 2007, 07:30am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: N.KY
Posts: 87
double swing?????

If the batter was trying to "protect the runner" as another thread implied, then that is int. and should be called.
__________________
UMP64

Thoes who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it!
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 18, 2007, 10:56am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: N.KY
Posts: 87
double swing

If the batter is waving the bat, deliberately delaying the swing or doing any thing to protect the runner, in PU's judgement, other than a true swing to hit the ball, this is batter INT. The batter is not permitted to do anything other than a normal attempt to hit the ball swing. Any other action to PROTECT" the runner in illegal.
__________________
UMP64

Thoes who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it!
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 16, 2007, 11:08am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Plymouth, MN
Posts: 741
Send a message via Yahoo to MNBlue
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrowder
Very different sitch. If the swinging of the bat is somewhat near the timing of the ball coming through, you're probably just ruling a strike.

If you truly feel that there was no attempt to hit the ball at all, and only an attempt to interfere .... don't you think that is not a strike, but rather interference?
Absolutely no attempt to hit the ball. Obviously, the 'intent' (we don't have intent anymore, do we?) was to 'freeze' the middle fielders and and the catcher, hoping to give the runner a better opportunity to steal.

If that act could be construed as interfence, wouldn't fake bunting be as well?
__________________
Mark

NFHS, NCAA, NAFA
"If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?" Anton Chigurh - "No Country for Old Men"
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
strike zone ToGreySt Baseball 8 Sat Jul 15, 2006 04:12pm
Check Swing - Dropped Third Strike carldog Baseball 7 Fri Jun 10, 2005 07:48am
Define swing - bunt or strike schoony Baseball 10 Tue May 17, 2005 06:54pm
Is a Swing a Strike? Shmuelg Softball 10 Mon Jul 19, 2004 12:38pm
Is a swing a strike? Shmuelg Baseball 12 Thu Jul 15, 2004 12:27pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:15am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1