i argued a called at our game today. the opposing player squared away to bunt the ball. he NEVER pulled the bat back. our catcher threw the ball down to third to catch the baserunner stealing. i asked the umpire what the call was,to be sure he called the strike. he said the batter pulled back and the pitch was a ball. i asked the field umpire for an appeal, and he said the batter didnt make an effort toward the pitch. my point is this, if you are squared to bunt the ball, that right there is an effort at the pitch. if the batter does not pull the bat back, the pitch should be a strike. the field umpire says thats not correct and he still needs to move the bat in an attempt to strike the ball. who is correct???? i think we got a horrible call. from day one, i was taught that if you arent going to bunt the ball, remember to always pull your bat back on a bad pitch. now he didnt move the bat at all, he was squared for the pitch and NEVER pulled the bat back, is it a strike?
2007-06-23 13:18:30 · 16 answers · asked by Dave 1 in Sports ➔ Baseball
Sorry, but you're wrong. The batter need not pull the bat back to avoid being charged with a swinging strike. The question is whether the batter struck at the ball. Simply holding the bat over the plate is not striking at the ball.
Wow, most of you people are seriously misguided. Unbelievable. Or maybe not, considering that none of you who claim the batter has to pull the bat back can provide a rule citation.
As for the guy claiming to have been an umpire, nowhere is "breaking the knuckles" taught as a standard in determining whether the batter struck at the pitch.
2007-06-23 17:34:31 · answer #1 · answered by Ryan R 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You're actually asking the question in a way that might have justified the umpire's call.
Just because the batter is "squared" to bunt the ball doesn't necessarily mean that the batter has "offered" (extended the bat) to the ball.
Depending on your position on the field and the speed of the play, you may have assumed something the umpire might have seen differently, and the play you describe also can block the umpire (which is why the play is often appealed to the appropriate first or third base umpire).
So, just for argument's sake the batter might have squared to "show" the pitcher his intention to bunt the ball but held the bat back. If the batter never extended the bat through the strike zone and the ball doesn't hit the batter (important if the batter doesn't have both feet in the batter's box), then the pitch will be called a ball or strike purely based on the ball's flight. This would especially be true if the bat was always held close to the body in a vertical position.
Just because the batter has squared around is not considered sufficient to have "offered" at the ball.
2007-06-24 02:59:47 · answer #2 · answered by Tony S 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I was an umpire in South Carolina for three years covering most age groups through high school age. In the instance described the "squaring" mentioned has to be more than half the distance to a level swing in the normal motion of a swing. If the batter did not fully extend the bat then it is not a strike as the knuckles were not broken. If the batter did indeed motion as to a level swing in the form of a bunt then yes it is called a strike.
One thing to remember. Umpires are human and there aren't many field umpires that will argue or disagree with the plate umpire. The impression is to have a unified front and be the quote unquote law on the field.
Allow them a mistake every once in awhile. It's a sport for God's sake not a science.
2007-06-23 20:42:02 · answer #3 · answered by dndrick 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
yes it is , as long as he does not pull the bat back before the pitch cross the plate . Even if the batter does pull it back if the ball still ends up in the strike zone its a strike and ball if its not .
2007-06-24 00:04:46 · answer #4 · answered by primet21 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
What Ryan R and others said.
The only relevant part of rule 2.00 is that it's a strike when the ball
"(a) Is struck at by the batter and is missed"
And "A BUNT is a batted ball not swung at"
2007-06-24 02:56:01 · answer #5 · answered by DaM 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Even in the majors Ive seen this move not referred to as a strike and I hate that! I think if hes squared to bunt and does not pull it back it should be a strike!
2007-06-23 20:22:47 · answer #6 · answered by Knowledgewise J 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Technically you have to make an attempt to strike the ball. squaring away is just a type of stance. if there is no attempt to hit the ball the only way it is a strike is if it is over the plate or he tries to hit the ball. Sorry. did you win?
obviously I am the only one that doesn't agree with you here. Sometimes opinions can be unpopular.
2007-06-23 20:25:11 · answer #7 · answered by Traveler 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
If the batter doesn't pull the bat back, its a strike. He doesn't have to dive or jab at the ball for it to be a strike. He has to pull the bat back when squared or its a strike.
2007-06-23 20:21:22 · answer #8 · answered by big stan 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
if his bat was through the strike zone, then its a strike, so the field umpire is right
2007-06-23 20:22:36 · answer #9 · answered by Jesse K 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If he does not pull the bat back, it is a strike. Plain and simple.
2007-06-23 20:50:10 · answer #10 · answered by Tim_E 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋