this CHANGE, that changed a lot!

[RADcatcher]

Yes much of umpire's decisions are judgment decisions.

Hmmm do not think the rule application has to do with if it's intentional by the batter or not. Which can be truly difficult to determine by an Umpire if something is intentional or not.


Just for notation
This ruling does not talk about the river. It talks about in the strike zone.

 

[The Man In Blue]

Judgement call

As was alluded to, ALL calls are judgements. An umpire does not have judgement on how to adjudicate a hit-by-pitch, although they may have different judgements on where/why the ball and the body made contact with one another. That isn't a judgement call, that is the umpire's judgement.

There is no rule preventing a batter from placing any part of their body over home plate, so long as their feet are legally positioned. Tell me the batter is out there and I will look at you and shrug. That is legal. However, there is also a rule that penalizes a batter from preventing a strike from entering the strike zone or making bodily contact with a ball in the strike zone.

Pitching coaches should teach their pitchers that the plate is theirs. Plain and simple.

I'm with @RADcatcher . . . and USA Softball since they are the only softball org that still requires the batter to attempt to get out of the way. Baseball codes still require the attempt, though some lazy umpires and less-than-ethical coaches will try to tell you otherwise.

I miss making that call in USA Softball. "Dead ball! Stay HERE!" (point emphatically to the plate) "Ball!" Here comes the coach. Me, smiling and nodding: "Yes. Yes. Uh-huh. You are absolutely correct coach, IF we were playing NFHS rules. USA still requires them to move though. Pleasure doing business with you."

My nephew's stance is one where he sticks his armor-covered elbow over the plate. I was watching one of his varsity games where he was rung up looking. I was sitting by the dugout when he came back to the dugout whining and fussing. I called him over and asked what the problem was that he was giving attitude to the umpire.

He said, "That hit my elbow!"

"Where was your elbow?"

"Over the plate like my coach taught us."

"OK, you're a dumb arse and so is your coach, then. Dead ball, strike three. Get your elbow out of the strike zone."

 

[Rolling Hard]

When 3 batters in a row have their elbow in the strike zone there is probably a stupid coach nearby.

 

[Vertigo]

Judgement call

As was alluded to, ALL calls are judgements. An umpire does not have judgement on how to adjudicate a hit-by-pitch, although they may have different judgements on where/why the ball and the body made contact with one another. That isn't a judgement call, that is the umpire's judgement.

There is no rule preventing a batter from placing any part of their body over home plate, so long as their feet are legally positioned. Tell me the batter is out there and I will look at you and shrug. That is legal. However, there is also a rule that penalizes a batter from preventing a strike from entering the strike zone or making bodily contact with a ball in the strike zone.

Ok let’s call it an “opinion call” then.

Unfortunately I think some NCAA umpires need to be re-educated then. When my dd hit a batter who intentionally leaned into inside pitches every at-bat and she finally got called on it - the other coach went nuts and the umpire explained to her that it was a “judgement call” and “in his opinion, she leaned into the pitch.”

 

[Vertigo]

Yes much of umpire's decisions are judgment decisions.

Hmmm do not think the rule application has to do with if it's intentional by the batter or not. Which can be truly difficult to determine by an Umpire if something is intentional or not.

NCAA rule 11.13.1 discusses the batter not being awarded 1st base if she obviously tried to get HBP.

Maybe different rule sets state otherwise but unless specified, I typically discuss NCAA rules.

 

[RADcatcher]

NCAA rule 11.13.1 discusses the batter not being awarded 1st base if she obviously tried to get HBP.

Maybe different rule sets state otherwise but unless specified, I typically discuss NCAA rules.

My point~ it's difficult to determine intention. Because of that regardless of intention a batter can still be awarded first base.

. Definitely agree purposely trying to get hit by a pitch should not be awarded first base.


( do not see 11.13.1 in the rulings you posted. Would be nice to see that verbiage also, will look again)
??? Hmmm no can find in that link...

 

[Vertigo]

( do not see 11.13.1 in the rulings you posted. Would be nice to see that verbiage also, will look again)
??? Hmmm no can find...
View attachment 29195





I agree that there are times when things look obvious that someone tried to get hit by a pitch and that it can be called. But it does not have to be something that looks intentional for it to be called.

11.13.2
Look at bolded underlined sentence
Does not require intension of the batter. Just body blocks pitch.

View attachment 29194




Here is another example
Batter does a check swing and holds their bat from coming forward however they still step and rotate their side and tushie toward the plate.
Bringing their side across the Batters box and into where a zoned pitch is coming across. And they get struck by it. Intention or not to get hit if it blocks the pitch from coming through It still can be an infraction of Body In the Zone.

I did a Google search and easily found it.

 

[Vertigo]

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/Stats_Manuals/Softball/Softball_Rules.pdf

Page 99 specifically.

 

[Vertigo]

Which it's difficult to determine intention. And I definitely agree purposely trying to get hit by a pitch should not be awarded first base.

( do not see 11.13.1 in the rulings you posted. Would be nice to see that verbiage also, will look again)
??? Hmmm no can find...
View attachment 29195

Verbiage isn’t in what I initially posted because those were “rule changes” for 2023 - not the whole rule set.

 

[RADcatcher]

Verbiage isn’t in what I initially posted because those were “rule changes” for 2023 - not the whole rule set.

yep could have Googled but since you added a link I looked at that.
Good you brought up that was not the whole rule set in your original link. Yep rules and verbiage change.