Double swing

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by mick

For discussion purposes, WMB asks if RS 24 applies.
You state RS 24 applies as fact.
Do you know something that WMB does not?

Actually, i took it as rhetorical, but could be wrong.

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

So if a batter twirls a bat while the pitcher is releasing the ball, that is a swing and you are going to call a strike on a pitch that is outside the zone for that reason?

If she swings.. its a swing.. doesnt sound like you described a swing.

Good luck, please stay away from my tournaments.

All right, but when 1 of your 5 umpires quits, dont come sniveling to me. I was looking forward to my trip to miserable delaware too!

BTW, I have seen nothing from ASA on this issue in the five years that I have been aware of this "California Drag Bunt" has been seen on the field.

Maybe they are letting you squirm based on obvious existing rule without going out on a limb and actually taking a stand.. similar to gorilla grip.

It seems pretty clear to me though.

Maybe I'd have to see it... dont see this california drag bunt in CA .. at least I havent.

[IamMatt]

I know a baton twirler who would probably be pretty good at that...I've seen one-handed drag bunts but not the behind-the-back switch-the-bat bunt.

[bkbjones]

It's not a swing.

There. Yelling it makes me feel better. Mike is right...we did discuss this ad nauseum, and I'm about to be nauseum again. If that means I have to go to Delaware, then so be it.

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by bkbjones

It's not a swing.

There. Yelling it makes me feel better. Mike is right...we did discuss this ad nauseum, and I'm about to be nauseum again. If that means I have to go to Delaware, then so be it.

No way ya vulture.

I'm gonna google it up this weekend and maybe see if I can take a looksee at it.. maybe I'll change my mind, especially with mike playing hardball with his umpire slots.

I've had my heart set on Delaware since I found out it never gets above 12F and only stops snowing enough to rain. Plus I really enjoy contaminated water and 5 legged dogs.

[mcrowder]

Not a swing. Actions in OP are legal. Why is this coming up again - didn't we resolve this recently?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

No way ya vulture.

I'm gonna google it up this weekend and maybe see if I can take a looksee at it.. maybe I'll change my mind, especially with mike playing hardball with his umpire slots.

I've had my heart set on Delaware since I found out it never gets above 12F and only stops snowing enough to rain. Plus I really enjoy contaminated water and 5 legged dogs.

And this from someone who lives in a state where people build houses on cliffs and hillsides only to have them slide into the ocean or valley after a good rain and then are dumb enough to rebuild on the same site. A state which does not allow people to enter forests to clear naturally downed timber and then cannot figure out what stokes the horrendous fires which kill people and causes billions of dollars in lost property. A state which will not permit the building of power plants and then cannot figure out why there is an energy issue.

Back to point, check out page 221 of ASA Umpire Manual. Under the "check swing" is the closest thing I can find to define what ASA believes to be a swing. #2 states "swinging through the ball and bringing or drawing the bat back, unless drawing it back before the pitch gets to the bat.

I read this as saying that it IS a swing, but only if the ball was actually there for the bat to strike.

[WestMichBlue]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I read this as saying that it IS a swing, but only if the ball was actually there for the bat to strike.

Come on, Mr. ASA - you are denying what your own people have written. Someone somewhere in ASA heirarchy deliberately wrote that it is illegal to hit the ball on a second swing. There has to be a reason (does there really?) for ASA to write that statement.

On a 60 mph pitch that reaches the plate in less than a half second, there is no way in hell that a batter can wait until "the ball was actually there for the bat to strike" and swing twice and actually hit the ball. Obviously, the swing has to start early so as to get the bat around a second time. Fact is, the bat swing has to start before the pitch is even released.

And if the batter is really good enough to hit the ball on the second swing, ASA says that is illegal - strike on the batter and return base runners.

WBM

[Dakota]

Second "swing".... not second time the bat is moved. There is no requirement for the bat to remain stationary before the first swing.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by WestMichBlue

Come on, Mr. ASA - you are denying what your own people have written. Someone somewhere in ASA heirarchy deliberately wrote that it is illegal to hit the ball on a second swing. There has to be a reason (does there really?) for ASA to write that statement.

Which has what to do with the point that the issue under discussion is that there wasn't two swings?

On a 60 mph pitch that reaches the plate in less than a half second, there is no way in hell that a batter can wait until "the ball was actually there for the bat to strike" and swing twice and actually hit the ball. Obviously, the swing has to start early so as to get the bat around a second time. Fact is, the bat swing has to start before the pitch is even released.

Thank you for proving the point. How can the initial movement of the bat be considered a swing if the ball hasn't even been released yet?

And if the batter is really good enough to hit the ball on the second swing, ASA says that is illegal - strike on the batter and return base runners.

WBM

Again, this is not the discussion. My part of this discussion has been completely along the premise of what constitutes a swing, not that there was more than one.

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

And this from someone who lives in a state where people build houses on cliffs and hillsides only to have them slide into the ocean or valley after a good rain and then are dumb enough to rebuild on the same site.

Who cares, makes for cool video.

A state which does not allow people to enter forests to clear naturally downed timber and then cannot figure out what stokes the horrendous fires which kill people and causes billions of dollars in lost property.

Well you've probably never been in a forest, but as someone who has lived in it virtually his entire life including right now.. thats incorrect Mike. Its the undergrowth that the libs snivel about burning off thats the problem, not the downed trees. This layer upon layer of underbrush and growth once it goes causes a raging fire which is enough to catch the trees on fire.. as opposed to a healthy forest where undergrowth should burn without necessarily causing a forest fire.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

Well you've probably never been in a forest,

I'll remember that the next time on the App trail, or hanging out in the Banner Elk, NC area, or up around Franconia, NH or maybe...well, never mind, you get the idea.

but as someone who has lived in it virtually his entire life including right now.. thats incorrect Mike. Its the undergrowth that the libs snivel about burning off thats the problem, not the downed trees. This layer upon layer of underbrush and growth once it goes causes a raging fire which is enough to catch the trees on fire.. as opposed to a healthy forest where undergrowth should burn without necessarily causing a forest fire.

I agree and maybe it is the area and climate. What I have always witnessed in my 50+ years is that mother nature is pretty good at taking care of herself when allowed. Even in dense areas, leaves, needles and twigs are scattered or breakdown. However, when fallen branches and other timber are allowed to remain, they trap nature's debris. I have to believe that these type of collection areas are what causes the high-intensity fires to sustain their life in areas where that should not happen. Clearing the downed timber will help mother nature and it would happen at no cost to any government agency.