Bunt attempt

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by tcannizzo

I don't like the rule myself, but the only logic I can apply that makes any sense is that a successful bunt does not require an "offer". Simply holding the bat still can result in a successful bunt. However, this does require the pitch to be in the vicinity of the bat. This is the reason I don't like the rule. If the bat is held belt high and the pitch is in the dirt, etc. does not equate to a strike in my book.

Another potential reasoning is similar to a check swing. We will call SWING if the bat enters the "hitting zone", even if the pitch is a mile a way.

No I don't. I've had players who don't want to walk just swing the bat when the ball isn't in the area. The definition requires a strike be called if the batter swings and missed a pitch. If there is no pitch to hit, how can it be a strike?

Hmmmmmm.....

Then again there is also the point that a pitch which hits a bat behind the batters head (still on the shoulder) makes a very good bunt, but it is not a strike if the pitched ball passes near the bat. Why, because the batter wasn't trying to strike the ball which, IMO, is the basis of any pitched ball being called a strike.

There is no logical reason to eliminate that requirement.