Inadvertant Ball 4

[rbi]

Runner on 1st and 2nd HP umpire signals and voices 3 balls and 2 strikes, next pitch called ball (we thought ball 4), batter jogs to first, other runners advance to 2nd and 3rd. NOW after base umpire recognizes what just happened, and scorekeeper agree that it was ONLY ball three, defensive coach argue's and UMPIRES are now trying to call batter out for touching first base. Are you serious!

Similar situation, batter gets hit in forearm by pitch, in actual visual pain when walking to first. Umpire says batter is out after touching first, ball never hit her in his opinion.

Someone please tell me the rule concerning batter touching first and being ruled out (cant find in book)? Does this have to do with coachs teaching their kids to trick the defense and walk to first KNOWING count is not ball 4 allowing other runners to advance?

[SoCalASABlue]

For an inadvertent ball four call, the PU could correct the obvious error but the defense is also supposed to know the count - so the catcher could have thrown the incorrect ball four to 3B to get the lead runner. That appeal would be interesting considering the facts in your scenario.

As for the hit batter that the PU didn't see get hit, too bad for the kid but she goes back to the plate to finish the at-bat unless the PU called strike three on the ball that hit her. I guess you could have appealed to the BU if the PU gave up that call, but I doubt the PU would do that.

If the umpires insist on calling each of the batters out once they touch 1B, assuming the TD or other official that handles protests has a clue, I see two easily won protests for incorrect interpretations of the rules.

But - as has been exemplified many times on this site - assuming tournament or league officials know the rules like they should is at best a crapshoot.

[Bretman]

Weird. This whole "batter being out for touching first base when she's not allowed to" thing seemed to have been a running theme in this game!

You know, usually when an umpire blows a rule interpretation, there's some logical explanation. He has either missed some point in the rule book, has the rule half-right, (but half-wrong), has applied the wrong rule to the wrong situation or is trying to enforce one of the many documented "rule myths" that have been around forever.

This one has me totally scratching my head. There is no rule about a batter (who has not legally become a batter-runner) being out for touching first base. There isn't any similar rule I can think of that could be improperly interpreted this way. And of all the many, many "wrong" rules and rule myths that players, coaches and fans have thrown at me over the years I have NEVER heard this one before.

Just when you think you've heard 'em all...

[Jalamander]

Someone please tell me the rule concerning batter touching first and being ruled out (cant find in book)?

And the question has to be asked....So, how did the rest of the game go after you won the protest?

[rbi]

For an inadvertent ball four call, the PU could correct the obvious error but the defense is also supposed to know the count - so the catcher could have thrown the incorrect ball four to 3B to get the lead runner. That appeal would be interesting considering the facts in your scenario.

After explaining to umpire that wanted to call batter out that HP umpire blew the count, batter was allowed to finish at bat, although it wasnt easy to convince blues since they had this new rule in the book. Sure defense is supposed to know count and outs as well, but when HP umpire tells you count is full, then you as a defense go on that assumption. Yes it would have been VERY interesting if runner would have been thrown out walking to next bag on what was thought to be ball 4.

As for the hit batter that the PU didn't see get hit, too bad for the kid but she goes back to the plate to finish the at-bat unless the PU called strike three on the ball that hit her. I guess you could have appealed to the BU if the PU gave up that call, but I doubt the PU would do that.
After long debate, batter was called OUT for touching first, not strike three as this was 2nd pitch to batter. This is the call that cracked me up


If the umpires insist on calling each of the batters out once they touch 1B, assuming the TD or other official that handles protests has a clue, I see two easily won protests for incorrect interpretations of the rules.

If I remember correctly UIC WAS doing this game

But - as has been exemplified many times on this site - assuming tournament or league officials know the rules like they should is at best a crapshoot.

[wadeintothem]

If you are who I think you are, then I've been the UIC at your tournament the past two weekends and that wasnt my call nor was it ever brought up to me nor ever discussed with me. If youre talking some other weekend or park, then disregard.

Of course .. kind of stretching things around a little is definately in your bag of tricks...

In fairness though, this team's org is the host of the tourney and their own rules are no protests allowed so that is not an option. The PU must allow and rule on any protest... not a UIC.

[rbi]

Wade, All I am going by is what I saw, what was ruled, and what was discussed. I dont know how I could stretch something that I have never heard of before. All I am trying to do is understand this rule for future reference. I apologize in advance if you did not work this game Wade, i could have sworn you did though, although that day was 13 hours long at ball field and things started to run together. From what was told to me after game, that it was interpreted that IF "batter is not awarded first base by either a walk, hit batsman, catchers interference, and batter continues to bag without being awarded first, batter is out, regardless". True or False?

[wadeintothem]

Somehow, I feel like something is missing in the translation/understanding here, so I will speak in only general terms and not address at this point your situation -

There is no rule that a batter is out by the mere fact of touching 1B.

For example,

Count is 3-1... batter believes ball 4 comes in and runs down to 1B.

Ball was actually strike 2.

The batter is returned to the box and is at bat with a count of 3 and 2.

If runners advanced, they would stay advanced because it is on the defense to know the count.

The only rule that could come into play would be a time rule once the batter is directed back to the box, normally I doubt that would ever be an issue though.

If the umpire got the count wrong - there are two possible schools of thought

- Thats still your fault, it is on you guys to know the count and all action stands (I am in line with this). The count is what it is, it is not what is said it is.

- Rules allow for an umpire to correct any situation he caused (10.1 I believe or somewhere around there, I'm at work and no book) - generally I would not be in favor of using this rule in an case of wrong count whereby a runner advanced.

[rbi]

[quote="wadeintothem"]

There is no rule that a batter is out by the mere fact of touching 1B.



Thanks Wade you answered by question

[wadeintothem]

Post which game.

Many of the crews you've had the past couple of weeks have been long time good officials - ASA championship and NCAA officials. We've not had weak crews at the parks where you've played.

I remember one situation in a game with your team and a controversial hit batter and I was on the bases and my partner called me up so i looked at her arm and it was red with a forming lump and I told my partner she was obviously hit look at her arm and he awarded her 1B. I cant remember if that was for or against you guys though, but that was the correct call. The batter was hit, even though the PU missed it at first - correct call was made. She was not called out.

That must not be the same situation though, but i do feel like something is being missed in the presentation of all this.