What would you have done?

[NCASAUmp]

Since we're on the subject of 10-3-C, I'll toss this one out there. I was calling a game last year, and this happened to us. Here's the sitch...

ASA Men's SP. No outs, no runners on base. I'm BU. The pitcher pitches the ball for ball 1. Catcher throws it back to the pitcher, who immediately delivers the next pitch without a pause.

PU signals the DDB, then calls "illegal, no pitch." The batter swings anyway, grounding the ball past F6, who made minimal effort to go for the ball. The defense basically stopped because they had heard "no pitch" (even I heard it from B). The batter made it to 2B.

How would you correct this sitch? I'll tell you how we ruled later.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Since we're on the subject of 10-3-C, I'll toss this one out there. I was calling a game last year, and this happened to us. Here's the sitch...

ASA Men's SP. No outs, no runners on base. I'm BU. The pitcher pitches the ball for ball 1. Catcher throws it back to the pitcher, who immediately delivers the next pitch without a pause.

PU signals the DDB, then calls "illegal, no pitch." The batter swings anyway, grounding the ball past F6, who made minimal effort to go for the ball. The defense basically stopped because they had heard "no pitch" (even I heard it from B). The batter made it to 2B.

How would you correct this sitch? I'll tell you how we ruled later.

No pitch. You can't take that back after you call it even if it were wrong.
________
BlackSexQueen

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Since we're on the subject of 10-3-C, I'll toss this one out there. I was calling a game last year, and this happened to us. Here's the sitch...

ASA Men's SP. No outs, no runners on base. I'm BU. The pitcher pitches the ball for ball 1. Catcher throws it back to the pitcher, who immediately delivers the next pitch without a pause.

PU signals the DDB, then calls "illegal, no pitch." The batter swings anyway, grounding the ball past F6, who made minimal effort to go for the ball. The defense basically stopped because they had heard "no pitch" (even I heard it from B). The batter made it to 2B.

How would you correct this sitch? I'll tell you how we ruled later.

What ground ball? Couldn't have been a ground ball because there was no pitch. Apply the IP penalty (award the batter a ball) and move on.

I understand your partner screwed this one up, but if the declaration was prior to the batter hitting the ball, there is nothing to correct.

[Tru_in_Blu]

PU signals the DDB, then calls "illegal, no pitch."

I don't think a delivery can be both "illegal" and a "no pitch". So maybe that's where the first hint is. I think a quick pitch should be ruled illegal, and if the batter decides to swing anyway, that makes it legal.

But if there's a "no pitch" call, I think everything should be re-set to how it was prior to that no pitch ever happening.

Since the BU made both calls, he confused everybody possibly including himself.

I'd say "do over".

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

PU signals the DDB, then calls "illegal, no pitch."

I don't think a delivery can be both "illegal" and a "no pitch". So maybe that's where the first hint is. I think a quick pitch should be ruled illegal, and if the batter decides to swing anyway, that makes it legal.

But if there's a "no pitch" call, I think everything should be re-set to how it was prior to that no pitch ever happening.

Since the BU made both calls, he confused everybody possibly including himself.

I'd say "do over".

What about the IP called prior to the ball being put into play? You do not have to have a pitch for an IP to be called.

[Tru_in_Blu]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

What about the IP called prior to the ball being put into play? You do not have to have a pitch for an IP to be called.

A quick pitch is an infraction that results in DDB and a verbal call. Section 7 of SP pitching rule.

A no pitch [Section 9] effect is that the ball is dead, and all subsequent action on that pitch is canceled.

My position is that it was wrong to call the pitch both illegal and no pitch, because they have different effects.

The umpire erred in adding "no pitch" to his verbal call. The DDB signal and call of "illegal" was correct up until he added on.

[NCASAUmp]

Yeah, the PU admitted to me that he just had a brain fart. What he actually meant to say was, "dead ball." If this had happened a few years back, the PU would have been sort of right, as the ball would have been dead for the violating ASA 6-1-? (I forget the article). An automatic ball would be awarded to the batter. However, a couple of years ago, ASA removed the part about it being a dead ball, allowing the batters to hit a pitch that was delivered without the required 1 second pause.

Since the PU effectively killed the play by declaring "no pitch" (when he meant to say "dead ball"), we brought the batter back to the plate and counted the illegal pitch. We told the OC that he had the opportunity to protest the call if he thinks we got it wrong, which he declined. The batter then popped up for an out. Fortunately, the team ended up winning the game handily, so the bad call had minimal bearing on the game (unless you're one of those butterfly theory kind of guys).

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Yeah, the PU admitted to me that he just had a brain fart.

Tell your partner to make sure he pops into the confessional before Mass this weekend.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

A quick pitch is an infraction that results in DDB and a verbal call. Section 7 of SP pitching rule.

A no pitch [Section 9] effect is that the ball is dead, and all subsequent action on that pitch is canceled.

My position is that it was wrong to call the pitch both illegal and no pitch, because they have different effects.

The umpire erred in adding "no pitch" to his verbal call. The DDB signal and call of "illegal" was correct up until he added on.

I'm going to disagree. I don't believe you can ignore the infraction which took place prior to the umpire's error. The pitcher shouldn't get a pass on an attempt to cheat (and this was obviously the pitcher's intent) because the umpire screwed up the effect.

[ronald]

send the play to your asa reps.

In FP, if we have a ip followed by a no pitch, both are enforced. Regardless of that, I agree that the IP can not be ignored. Apply a penalty. No free ones for violating a pitching rule.

[Tru_in_Blu]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I'm going to disagree. I don't believe you can ignore the infraction which took place prior to the umpire's error. The pitcher shouldn't get a pass on an attempt to cheat (and this was obviously the pitcher's intent) because the umpire screwed up the effect.

Yabbut, doesn't the batter swinging at the illegal pitch cancel? Rule 6.7 Effect D. If a batter swings at onr contacts any illegal pitch,it is nullified and all play stands.

'Cept of course for the little matter of the "no pitch" call.

The defense may have attempted to cheat, but the offense attempted to take advantage.

So there!

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

Yabbut, doesn't the batter swinging at the illegal pitch cancel? Rule 6.7 Effect D. If a batter swings at onr contacts any illegal pitch,it is nullified and all play stands.

'Cept of course for the little matter of the "no pitch" call.

The defense may have attempted to cheat, but the offense attempted to take advantage.

So there!

The whole situation was a fuster cluck from the moment the PU said, "no pitch." I don't think there's any real good way to clean this up other than what we did.

Needless to say, I was pretty pissed at the PU. However, I think he does a lot of FP and MP, and SP may not be his stock-in-trade like it is with me (since that's all I ever do). Believe me, I've been reading rule 6 over and over again for the last 19 or 20 years. I know that's no excuse, but it does put things into perspective.

[ronald]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

Yabbut, doesn't the batter swinging at the illegal pitch cancel? Rule 6.7 Effect D. If a batter swings at onr contacts any illegal pitch,it is nullified and all play stands.

'Cept of course for the little matter of the "no pitch" call.

The defense may have attempted to cheat, but the offense attempted to take advantage.

So there!

Offense did what it was allowed to do. They did nothing wrong as taking advantage implies.

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

PU signals the DDB, then calls "illegal, no pitch."

I don't think a delivery can be both "illegal" and a "no pitch". So maybe that's where the first hint is. I think a quick pitch should be ruled illegal, and if the batter decides to swing anyway, that makes it legal.

But if there's a "no pitch" call, I think everything should be re-set to how it was prior to that no pitch ever happening.

Since the BU made both calls, he confused everybody possibly including himself.

I'd say "do over".

You can't "do over" the IP. Once PU said "Illegal" you've got a ball on the batter.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by KJUmp

You can't "do over" the IP. Once PU said "Illegal" you've got a ball on the batter.

While I am inclined to agree with awarding the ball, it isn't this simple. In SP, once PU said illegal, you've got nothing. You've got a pitch that unless struck at will result in the award of a ball. You don't have a ball until the pitch is completed without being struck at. The defense was deprived of it's opportunity to have the batter attempt at the pitch by the ball being called dead.
________
How To Roll A Blunt