Daily trivia (ASA)

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

...Now, in any given description of what the batter did, did she remove the bat sufficiently to NOT be a bunt attempt in that ruleset? If yes, then it isn't a bunt attempt, either, if the ball DOES accidentally hits the bat...

Regarding intent:

NFHS Rule 2-8: (underlining is my emphasis)

ART. 1 . . . Bunt. A bunt is a legally batted ball not swung at but intentionally tapped with the bat.

ART. 2 . . . Attempted Bunt. Any non-swinging movement of the bat intended to tap the ball into play. Holding the bat in the strike zone is considered a bunt attempt. In order to take a pitch, the bat must be withdrawn - pulled backward and away from the ball.

Now, I don't intend to make a stand on the use of "intentionally" or "intended" in these rules, but it does cause me to wonder: what is it when we have "a legally batted ball not swung at but unintentionally tapped with the bat"? (e.g. a checked swing, but the ball hits the bat while the batter is "Holding the bat in the strike zone...".)



Regarding removing the bat sufficiently to not be a bunt attempt:

NFHS Casebook: (again, underlining is my emphasis)

Rule: 2.8.2
2.8.2 SITUATION:

F1 pitches the ball; B1 squares to bunt and (a) leaves the bat in the strike zone without making any movement towards the ball; (b) makes a forward movement with the bat towards the ball; or (c) withdraws the bat prior to the ball entering the plate area.

RULING: In (a) and (b), a strike is called on the batter. Holding the bat in the strike zone or making any movement of the bat toward the ball is considered a bunt attempt. In (c), a ball is awarded to the batter; the bat was withdrawn from the plate area. (2-2-1; 2-56-1)

Is the NFHS saying they want the bat to be "withdrawn from the plate area" for it to not be a bunt attempt?