jeopardy
 

Is this "jeopardy" in the umpires rule sense?

Runner on 1st, 2 outs. Batter takes an uncaught strike 3.
Plate umpire, not thinking 2 outs, says "batter out".
Catcher roll ball into infield while BR advances to 1st, other runner to 2nd.

Is this a jeopardy for the defense which the umpire should rectify, or
is this a case of the players (e.g., in this play the catcher) should know the rule?

Please state which rules book if you think they differ.

My opinion, catcher needs to know the situation. No way you can rightfully call that batter-runner out, as the defense simply hasn't put her out, in any rule set.

Similar situations. 1) If umpire tells a player the wrong number of outs, player's responsibility regardless. Too bad, they should get it from their scorekeeper. 2) If umpire called "Time" in the middle of playing action, instead of "batter's out", it's a dead ball, batter-runner awarded first.

Never called a batter "out" on strikes unless the retired batter heads toward 1B when not entitled. Nor would I suggest verbalizing it as part of a call.

I feel once the PU calls batter out he is saying the pitch was NOT in the dirt, so it's over at that point. Just like a ref. can't undo a play killed once he blows the whistle.

THE PLATE UMPIRE THOUGHT The batter was not entitled because of the runner at 1st.
Are you saying not to verbalize when that is the case? IOW, let the players figure it out for themselves?

You might be missing the point. It was obviously uncaught. The mistake was calling the batter out when not.
Are you saying the mistaken "out" call can't be ignored?

In the OP there were two outs so she certainly was.

Right, corrected the post above with "THE PLATE UMPIRE THOUGHT "

This part should be fixed - doesn't matter how many outs - don't say "batter out on strike three".

That said, in your sitch I agree with the previous answers.

Except that you do if there is one out and the batter starts to run toward an occupied first base. So, sure he should have known the batter could run but perhaps he had the wrong number of outs in his head.

Yes, but you definitely don't have it as part of your pitch call like so many do... "Strikethreebattersout" should never happen.

I would say batter's out in your situation. And might also in an unclear catch-no-catch by the catcher when I'm calling a catch. But not immediately after the pitch call - and usually while pointing to the catcher's glove.

But it isn't. The ball remains live, and a misapplied rule can (and should) be corrected.

So, you say yes to my OP question.

Your original response included "My opinion, catcher needs to know the situation", which made me think you were saying no. That is, ignore the mistake and let the BR be safe. :confused:

Yes, that's what he said.

You're confused because the misapplied rule here was the PU ruling the batter out. He is still saying the same thing.

Oh yeah, I see.

My original question was whether this mistake by the PU should be rectified. IOW whether it qualifies under the jeopardy rule.

That would mean, IF he could judge that IF the catcher had not been told an out, would she have tried a play at 1st and PROBABLY gotten the out.

Notice - BIG IFs and a BIG reach by the ump to ASSUME an out if played at 1st are a separate question.

Players and coaches should know the situation. Umpire has egg on his face and must suck it up.
Agree, better not to verbalize unless batter runs to first when she isn't supposed to.

I'm commenting on the mechanic, not the play, in saying the word "OUT" should not come out of the umpire's mouth unless there is a situation where the retired batter is heading toward 1st on a U3K when not entitled.

Not to drive this into the ground...
The only time I've ever heard "Strike 3 batters out" has been on television show/commercial/movie umpires.

Is it possible that the order of events was:
U3K, batter runs, PU says, "batter out", F2 rolls ball? Then we have the PU giving bad game situation info, putting defense in jeopardy. And we can better debate whether it can be rectified.

If the order of events in the OP is precise, then yes, bad mechanics, you shouldn't say that, AND bad game situation info.

I already did. ;) :D

OK, I will work on my presentation skills. That is what I though I described in the OP, although I now realize I should have included "batter runs" before "Plate umpire, not thinking 2 outs, says "batter out"".

Unfortunately, the rule (and the direction given in clinics) doesn't say anything about "giving bad game situation info". The rule about rectifying situations where we have put a team in jeopardy has to do only with incorrect rule applications or changed calls.

But at some point you have to change the call. He called the batter out by mistake. If he never fixes it the batter is out and the inning is over.

But what you said a little further might be objectionable if I took it like this. Suppose the sequence was.
"Strike three."
Batter starts to run.
"Batters out."
Catcher tosses ball toward circle.
"#@%@, two outs, batter is NOT OUT"
Pitcher runs for the ball, barehands it toward first base and runner is safe on a bang bang play.

versus

"Strike three."
Batter starts to run.
"Batters out."
Catcher tosses ball toward circle.
Pitcher knowing the umpire was wrong runs for the ball, barehands it toward first base and runner is safe on a bang bang play.
Then umpire says, dang, runner was not out.

Whatever the right way to think about those two scenarios, the idea that the first is more clearly in favor of the defense seems absurd to me.

Doesn't this have the potential for a changed call? Isn't that one of the main points of this thread?

yes

Or delayed calls

I think this is the consensus.
Definite mistake by PU to call an out when BR is eligible to run.
Players (e.g., catcher) are responsible to know the rule and make the play anyway.
No need to apply the jeopardy rule, even if ITUJ the defense would have gotten the out with a throw to 1st.
BR remains safe at 1st.

That's my ruling.

Agree.

Another point for consideration: Unless you're regularly working 12U rec ball, you will see that the overwhelming majority of catchers worth their salt will know to immediately come up with the throw after failing to catch the third strike with two outs. They won't be affected by a plate umpire erroneously calling the batter out. If one does, shame on her.