Notre Dame vs Missouri Dead Ball Strike/Hit By Pitch (Video)
 

At around the 2:01:00 mark of a game between Notre Dame and Missouri, a play occurs that has me confused. The 1-2 pitch hits the batter who appears to be in the strike zone when hit. The batter doesn't swing. The initial call is a DBS, then when all is said and done, the announcers say it was a dead ball - no strike, no HBP, and no ball.

Is there another option in the NCAA rules that isn't present in the NF rule set? As per 7-2-1g, & 7-2-1h, I would have a DBS. That wasn't the final call.

The game can viewed on replay at Watch ESPN.

First:

If you want others to comment, it is always best to post a link, not just tell people where they might find it, if they choose to search.

Second:

Yes, there is another ruling (which I cannot confirm since I really don't plan to search for this spot). Under NCAA rules, if an umpire judges a batter was hit by a pitch that has not yet reached home plate, and is not completely in the batter's box, the umpire is NOT to judge/guess if the pitch would have been a ball or strike; by rule, it is a "no pitch".

1. I'm new to the SB forum. On the basketball forum, there are posters that take the given information, and will then upload aninning embedded clip of the play so that no one has to search for it.

2. Thanks. Your ruling on the play accurately fits the resolution of the play. :)

3. Try this link - http://espn.go.com/watchespn/player/...ize/condensed/.

I just watched the video, and they play is not what Steve described. That particular rule (NCAA 11.15.3.4) is aimed at slap hitters moving towards the front of the box.

The umpire in the OP was incorrect. His options were to call a dead ball-strike (if the ball was in the strike zone), a dead ball-ball, or award first base. A "no pitch" is not the correct call in this situation.

In my opinion, the ball looks to be in the batters box, but it looks as if she threw her hip into the pitch. A dead ball -ball would have been appropriate. Interesting that the batter had already been hit by a pitch earlier in the game.

I just watched the clip and the batter definitely threw the hip out in an attempt to get hit. But, Im not sure the umpire didn't in fact add a ball to the count. The count was 1-2 before the batter got hit and the on screen count does not change. The at bat ends in a line out to F3, but, right after the umpire finishes speaking with the male coach, he walks back into position, puts on his mask and then indicates the count. The angle is horrible, but if you pause the video it looks to me like he is holding up 2 fingers on the left hand. That would mean he did in fact add a ball to the count, whoever was running the on screen count did not add it.

Someone should tell the talking heads that sometimes it is better to just keep your mouth shut instead of continuing to ramble about something they know nothing about.

WTF do the hands being in the strike zone have to do with ANYTHING unless that was the part of the body hit by the pitch?

I agree with what others have said; the pitch was a dead ball "ball", not in the strike zone, but the batter made the ball hit her, not the pitch location. I also think the umpire restarted at 2-2, just the announcers adding another point that screwed up viewers' perceptions of the call.

Copying Big Slick post to note that, despite our knowledge that 11.15.3.4 is particularly intended to address slappers out front, the rule isn't limited to that. The actual language would require a "no pitch" ANYTIME
10.10.5 restates the same rule in the category of "NO PITCH", whereas 11.5.3 addresses all the possibilities when a batter is hit by pitch.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/WeEJ4X372TE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Thanks for the video embed, APG.

Dead-ball ball, 2-2 count. Good call. The video shows the PU pointing to the batter's box line and (presumably) pointing out that the pitch was not in the batter's box and she tried to get hit.

The "don't care, coach, I got work to do" look on the U3's face at the end of the clip (0:55) is great. Also, TV softball commentators are the worst.

Don't think she move into the ball, but definitely took the hit intentionally.

While her knees may have moved closer to the plate, I believe the ball contacted her in the BB

With ASA, it is just a dead-ball and a ball. NCAA, take the base.

To each his own. I see her hips push forward to initiate contact. I won't question your judgment; I don't want to get ejected! :D

And I see her turning her hip away from the ball as to not take the hit on the bone. Probably learned that from watching clips of Ron Hunt :) . Wouldn't have made a difference, IMO if she just stood there, still would have been hit.

I guess this is why we call it judgment. :rolleyes: