The Official Forum - Batter "Walks" on Ball 3

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Softball (https://forum.officiating.com/softball/)

- - Batter "Walks" on Ball 3 (https://forum.officiating.com/softball/99321-batter-walks-ball-3-a.html)

ok..and after the 6th or 7th time of using this tactic, accomplishing nothing except delaying the game, would you just continue reminding the batter that is was only ball 3 and please come back to the box or would you take another approach?

Quote:

Originally Posted by wallyb (Post 955461)

I'm sensing a bit of troll-ism here.

no..its not that at all. im just looking for the proper way to handle this situation. if im asking to many questions its because im ignorant of what to do. i came on this site because i have been following it and decided to join in. am i taking the wrong approach?..i know irishmafia knows what he is talking about but his answer of "call the game as it unfolds" doesnt really answer my question of what to do. what i read into his answer, if im getting this right, they can run every batter on ball 3 all they want and we have no grounds or rule basis to stop them because they are doing nothing wrong...is that correct? sorry if im giving the wrong impression

Quote:

Originally Posted by wallyb (Post 955498)

But you've been answered 4 times, all the same. And then you reply with a nearly identical situation that has the same answer.

Most of what you just posted is not correct, btw. Go read all of the previous replies, not just Irish.

My reference to troll-ism is because you're bringing up scenarios that are too far-fetched to be realistic. Six or seven times? I've never seen anything even remotely close.

By rule, you can call a strike on the batter for leaving the box (assuming the exceptions others have cited from the rule do not take place). If the coach wants to accept those strikes, so be it. If you really wanted to pull out the forfeit card because of the game delays, nobody could argue against it. You might even be able to forfeit since the coach is willfully violating rules. But those should be last resorts.

MannyA....thank you very much...now its clear...looking back i see that was what some of the others were trying to explain to me but i just didnt get it for some reason. at times i can be a little thick. thanks for your explanation and for everyones patience. no troll here, just trying to learn a few things

Just received this email (TASO = Texas High School - NFHS)

Quote:

Here is a situation that happened and the official policy provided by the TASO State Rules interpreter.

Question: Runners on first and second, one out, 2-2 count on the batter. Pitcher throws ball three. Batter tosses the bat to the dugout and trots to first; the runners jog forward one base (they do not run hard).
Defensive coach realizes what happened and tells her girls to throw to second and tag the runner. At this point, time is called and the offensive coach is told that it was ball 3 on the batter, so she would have to come back, but that the other two runners had legally stolen their bases and they would remain. The Defensive coach complains that this has to be illegal because otherwise batters would do it all the time.

Answer: Rule 8.1 addresses a number of ways a batter becomes a batter-runner. Rule 8.1.1.c. states that a batter becomes a batter-runner "...when...a fourth ball is called by the umpire." Therefore, the batter has no right to leave the batter's box and head to first base when she has a 3 ball count. This happens occasionally when a batter forgets the count and thinks she has ball four. Because the batter has no right to leave the box with a 3 ball count, when this happens the proper action on the part of the umpire(s) would be to immediately call a dead ball. This should prevent the situation you describe in your question. The rules are written with the intention of not allowing a team (offense or defense) to take advantage of the opposing team through "trickery" or deception. When this happens it is considered an "unsporting act"; and, the action you describe borders very closely on being an "unsporting act". In fact, if you believe the action of the batter was intentional, if would be an "unsporting act" and you would call time, call her out, eject her and return the runners. (See Rule 3.6.13.) However, the defensive players (and the runners on base) should always be aware of the count on the batter and be prepared to play accordingly. If, in the situation you describe, the umpire determined that the act was not intentional and time was not called, the runners would be allowed to remain at the bases they attained during the live ball play. If the defense was able to tag a runner out during the play, that out would remain. Additionally, after play has ended and/or time is called, the umpire may warn the offensive coach "...and eject the next player to exhibit behavior that is not in accordance with the spirit of fair play.", in other words an "unsporting act". (See 2015 Case Book 3.6.13 Situation B) This action addresses the defensive coach's concern about repetition of the batter's action.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fdt92 (Post 955909)

Just received this email... (TASO = Texas High School)

A few thoughts.

- It should be noted that the case play referenced that calls for a warning/ejection is an NFHS case play.

- I wonder what rule would allow you to call this batter OUT for her "unsporting act"? (Certainly not the one cited in the reply) :confused:

- "Defensive coach complains that this has to be illegal otherwise batter's would do it all the time".

Doesn't the coach have any faith in his player's ability to keep track of the count? Or, for that matter, his own ability to keep track of it and instruct his players accordingly? If it happened "all the time" wouldn't the defense start to catch on after awhile?

(Okay, probably a waste of bandwidth to point out that a coach's agrument might be illogical and stupid! :D)

Nowhere in the case play does it call for an out and even states the teams should be aware of the count and play accordingly. It also makes no mention of time being called. What do you tell the defensive coach who's team has recognized the situation and threw to tag the lead runner, but time was called during live playing action?

Quote:

Originally Posted by fdt92 (Post 955909)

Just received this email (TASO = Texas High School)

I wasn't planning to umpire in Texas anyway. :( :rolleyes:

I'm currently in TX working and checked into maybe working some games while I'm here. From what I have seen it appears a lot of the state split away from taso and went with other organizations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fdt92 (Post 955909)

Just received this email (TASO = Texas High School - NFHS)
...
In fact, if you believe the action of the batter was intentional, if would be an "unsporting act" and you would call time, call her out, eject her and return the runners. (See Rule 3.6.13.)

Well, whoever sent that really added a bunch of "stuff" that isn't supported by any rules I'm aware of. Call Time? Why? Case play 3.6.13B which is cited doesn't say we call Tim. Even in the case play after that one where a coach from the dugout throws an extra ball onto the field, play is not killed immediately.

Call the batter out? Under what rule? Certainly not under the Unsporting Act rule. The only time we call anyone out under 3-16 is when an offensive player is guilty of malicious contact or fighting. And in rule 7 on batters, I see nothing in there justifying an out call here.

And returning the runner is inappropriate. 3.6.13B's last sentence states that the runner's advance is legal. As the case play points out, the onus is on the defense to know the count.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fdt92 (Post 955909)

Just received this email (TASO = Texas High School - NFHS)

Answer: Rule 8.1 addresses a number of ways a batter becomes a batter-runner. Rule 8.1.1.c. states that a batter becomes a batter-runner "...when...a fourth ball is called by the umpire." Therefore, the batter has no right to leave the batter's box and head to first base when she has a 3 ball count. This happens occasionally when a batter forgets the count and thinks she has ball four. Because the batter has no right to leave the box with a 3 ball count, when this happens the proper action on the part of the umpire(s) would be to immediately call a dead ball. This should prevent the situation you describe in your question. The rules are written with the intention of not allowing a team (offense or defense) to take advantage of the opposing team through "trickery" or deception. When this happens it is considered an "unsporting act"; and, the action you describe borders very closely on being an "unsporting act". In fact, if you believe the action of the batter was intentional, if would be an "unsporting act" and you would call time, call her out, eject her and return the runners. (See Rule 3.6.13.) However, the defensive players (and the runners on base) should always be aware of the count on the batter and be prepared to play accordingly. If, in the situation you describe, the umpire determined that the act was not intentional and time was not called, the runners would be allowed to remain at the bases they attained during the live ball play. If the defense was able to tag a runner out during the play, that out would remain. Additionally, after play has ended and/or time is called, the umpire may warn the offensive coach "...and eject the next player to exhibit behavior that is not in accordance with the spirit of fair play.", in other words an "unsporting act". (See 2015 Case Book 3.6.13 Situation B) This action addresses the defensive coach's concern about repetition of the batter's action.

Let me paraphrase.....

Call "TIME" right away
If you think she did it on purpose, call her out and eject her
If you think it was an accident, bring her back and send runners back
Defense needs to be awake
If you don't call "TIME" let the runners stay
Keep the outs if the defense is on the ball....

I'm not seeing where this blurb does anything to help clarify this situation....

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy (Post 955942)

Well said! Just adds to the ambiguity. :rolleyes: