delaying the game?

[shipwreck]

NFHS game. Nobody on base. Count was 3-1 but batter and catcher think it is 2-2. Pitch comes in for a strike. Catcher throws around the horn. Batter starts to walk off like she struck out. Offensive coach wants delay of game and ball 4 on his batter. It was late in the game and a 1-0 score, not that this should have any bearing on the ruling. What do you rule. I was an observer not an umpire on this play. Dave

[3afan]

if coach call you on it you dont have much choice - ball 4

good reason to always give the count when you hit ball 3 or strike 2

[shipwreck]

But, should the coach have to call you on it for you to enforce it? Dave

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by shipwreck

NFHS game. Nobody on base. Count was 3-1 but batter and catcher think it is 2-2. Pitch comes in for a strike. Catcher throws around the horn. Batter starts to walk off like she struck out.

A little strange both had the wrong count. What was the pitch that took it to 3-1?

Offensive coach wants delay of game and ball 4 on his batter. It was late in the game and a 1-0 score, not that this should have any bearing on the ruling. What do you rule. I was an observer not an umpire on this play. Dave

Sorry, coach, but they had the right count. You must have misinterpreted one of my calls

[shipwreck]

If I remember correctly it was a little below the knees. I have definitely seen this pitch called both ways. PU called it a ball but both batter and catcher believed it was a strike. Dave

[KJUmp]

Reading the description of the sitch in the OP, I'm assuming that the pitch for what was strike two was a called strike?

If so, wouldn't there be a slightly decernible difference in the PU's voice and mechanics on a called strike three vs. a called strike two?
I would think that he'd have a little more "sell" on a called strike three that would kind of make at at least the batter and catcher aware that there's an out as opposed to how he'd communicate verbally and visually on a called strike one or two.

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by shipwreck

If I remember correctly it was a little below the knees. I have definitely seen this pitch called both ways. PU called it a ball but both batter and catcher believed it was a strike. Dave

OP states: "Count was 3-1, and batter and catcher think it's 2-2. The pitch came in for a strike."
Now you're saying "PU called it a ball."
My question, was the correct count now 3-2, or ball four?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by KJUmp

OP states: "Count was 3-1, and batter and catcher think it's 2-2. The pitch came in for a strike."
Now you're saying "PU called it a ball."
My question, was the correct count now 3-2, or ball four?

I think you are reading the thread incorrectly. It was 2-1 and the pitch was called a ball (for 3-1), but the players thought it was a strike (which made them believe it was 2-2)

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I think you are reading the thread incorrectly. It was 2-1 and the pitch was called a ball (for 3-1), but the players thought it was a strike (which made them believe it was 2-2)

Got it. Thanks Irish.

[shipwreck]

Mike, you have the description absolutely right. When it was 2-1 and the pitch came in, that is when both the batter and catcher didn't know what it was. They did know that the next pitch was called a strike. Dave

[3afan]

Originally Posted by shipwreck

But, should the coach have to call you on it for you to enforce it? Dave

no