My first post back.
 

I stopped umping to go to grad school-and that is now wrapping up .:cool:

So had my first weekend of ASA ball and it went pretty smooth. It was fun to get back out there. The weather was perfect and I got to work with two vets who know what they're doing. That helped for making my first weekend back go real smoothly.

I was doing the 12U's and had this happen...

A really slow, arc ridden change up comes in-a little inside- and the batter does this token- minor twist- get out of the way of the ball move. Ball hits her. I DON'T award 1B. Minor grief from coach, but not much.

In hindsight, I couldn't figure out if a token move is good enough or if it has to be a legimate move to get out of the way.

Would you have awarded 1B or not?

Its entirely your judgement as to wether to batter made a legitimate attempt to avoid being hit. I have had numerous cases where if the batter hadnt moved at all they would not have been hit, but they have been coached to roll their shoulder and back to the ball. By doing so they actually turn into the path of the ball and get hit. Based on your description and a slow arcing change up, no I probably would not award 1st on that.

It's always hard to tell without seeing the actual play (but hey, this is only a forum), but it seems like you could have given her 1st base. The ball belongs over or near the plate. The batter belongs in the batter's box. Unless the batter just stands there and either intentionally moves into the ball or intentionally does attempt to get out of the way of a ball that anyone could have avoided, I give the batter 1st base. I haven't gotten much grief over the years on this issue. The pitcher is more at fault than the batter in your case.

The batter also has the right to move and get hit somewhere other than if she hadn't moved. If the batter can't get out of the way and chooses to get hit in her lower back rather than in the ribs, I still have a hit by pitch.

I know your post addresses ASA. I would like to see more codes switch to the NCAA rule. I think that NCAA rules more in accordance with fair play and how most umpires enforce the rule (whether their code says they are technically correct or not).

I was told this this weekend ----> whether or not the girl makes any effort to get out of the way, if the ball is in the batter's box, then give her first because the pitch has no business being in the batters box ...... if not, the she needs to do something

not saying thats right or wrong, but an interesting perspective

Good enough for me. Dead ball, take your base.

That is not an ASA thing.

true, true ... didn't say it was :D

Once again, "She was only doing what she's supposed to do" rears it's ugly head. The rules do not say that.

When in doubt, I believe most umpires (self included) award the base. The sitch in the OP is a perfect example of when we shouldn't. Turning to minimize the pain on a pitch that can't be avoided is one thing. Turning to get hit by a slow pitch that is completely avoidable (and worse, turning to get hit by a pitch that was not going to hit her in the first place) should not be awarded a base.

Does the age matter to you (understanding what avoid is about)?

I am of the belief that ANY type of move to avoid being hit by the pitch qualifies as an attempt, and that includes freezing in the batter's box.

As the players get a little older, they get a little more craftier about sticking a knee or elbow out there on an inside pitch in an attempt to get on base. At the younger levels, my experience is that the players are still somewhat "scared" of being hit and will do whatever they can to avoid an errant pitch.

I, too, like the NCAA change this year. One of my mentors gave me this perspective several years ago.

Why do we require the batter to "make an attempt" to avoid a pitched ball that is not where it is supposed to be in the first place? In essance, the offense has to make up for the defense's mistake in order to be rewarded.

Probably because of baseball players like Ernie Pantusso. ;)

Sure.

I think the default is award the base. I'm not awarding the base only in cases where it's OBVIOUS that the batter (including whatever information I have that is relevant - speed of pitch, ability/age of batter, did the ball bounce, etc) intentionally failed to avoid the pitch. Freezing in fear or tensing to absorb the hit (as a lot of the younger ones will do) is not intentionally failing to avoid the pitch. Seeing the ball coming in, relaxing and watching it plunk your ankle IS - no base. Leaning in to put an elbow or knee in the way of a ball that was not going to hit the batter IS - no base.

This happened Saturday - batter put her knee out to get hit. no base ... and no argument at all, not even from her own parents.

But I believe you were saying the game being played was........

I argee the default to to award.
When NOT awarding, I believe it requires (For good practices) a very quick and decisive call.
I go with "DEAD BALL, BATTER STAY RIGHT HERE!" as I point to her batter's box. That may or may not require an explanation, but you were clearly making an immediate rulling based on gut at the time.

I had this is a 16U champ game one time. Coach came out and asked for me to check with partners. (Yes, I know - no need, but as our "be accommodating gesture" i did confer with partners.) They both said "I would not have called that." I simply said - I DID call it. We broke and I announced "CALL STANDS" and we played on. No issues.

I agree completely.

yes the original post did say ASA ...

So...
 

So the rules don't say "She was only doing what she's supposed to do" but the rules do say "take age into consideration when enforcing the rules"?

Just saying.

:)

No, they don't say either. The exact words are... "If no attempt is made to avoid being hit..." On the rare occasion that this is discussed at a clinic, a runner is generally responsible for avoiding the pitch IF SHE CAN. I cannot find a way to interpret that logically that doesn't include some sort of judgement as to the player's abilities (of which age/experience is a part)

This can be a slippery slope too
 

Will you take player's ability into account when calling IFR? The rule says ordinary effort. Will you pass on enforcing the IFR because the players ability makes any catch of a infield fly more than ordinary effort?

I'm not disagreeing with you on the hit by pitch scenario by the way. At the younger ages I've been instructed that if they get hit by a pitch give them first base. I'm talking 10U here. At this age they are not looking to get hit by the pitch so they can get on base. Sometimes they get the dear in the head light look and don't know what to do.

I'm just pointing out the fact that you are using a phrase not in the book to help you enforce the rules, just like some of us use "she's doing what she is supposed to do" to help us with interference. Can this phrase get an umpire in trouble? Sure, if not used properly. But so can using the players ability. If not used appropriately it can lead an umpire down the wrong path.

:)

Absolutely.

Agreed.

I'm sure I use a BUNCH of phrases that don't happen to be in the rulebook when describing a rule to someone. More often to a non-umpire in all likelihood. However, you've kind of hit the nail on the head with the reason why "she's just doing what she's supposed to do" is a bad catch-phrase. It's as often false as true - and more often than not (not by you, at least not that I've seen) used as a crutch by someone who doesn't know the rule. Sometimes his ruling is right, but he's got no idea WHY he's right (and, well, he's often wrong too). You just said the phrase can get an umpire in trouble. So why use it? (And, to note, it was incorrect when used in both this thread and the other one last week!).

I don't use the phrase "using the players ability" either - but in both rules where you've referenced it (probably more in IFF, actually, than the OP) it's true. I would NEVER use the phrase in explaining the ruling on the field or even here. Just as we shouldn't use the other one... a crutch that allows umpires to think they are ruling correctly when they aren't is a bad crutch and a bad habit.

Turning to avoid a pitch is common, and Ron Hunt made a carrier out of doing so on almost every pitch with which he was hit.

But as noted earlier, turning into the pitch (an in my opinion regardless of age/level) is not so easy to determine and is taught. This is a motion often used by the above mentioned MLBer and often argued about by the coach of the opposing team. And it was like an inside joke.

I understand a batter being frozen by a pitch, but even though they cannot move quick enough to avoid the pitch, they tend to flinch before contact.

This is one of those things that, if intentional, you will see it and call it. If the batter's movements don't make you immediately come up with the call, I think you offer the base.