- May 29, 2015
- 3,849
- 113
Well, the rule does mention “an act that confuses any fielder.” I think a case could be made that the act of the batter running to first base when they aren’t entitled to confused the catcher.
Now, the offensive coach would probably argue, maybe even correctly, that the batter just lost track of the count, there was no ill intent. I don’t think intent should matter. What did the defensive player do in response to the action of the offensive player?
This is my biggest argument for making this a dead ball. I am OK with assuming innocence (the first time) and not penalizing the offense, but I have serious issue with allowing them to benefit.
I still do not understand why "the defense should know" but the offense is allowed, nay, ENCOURAGED AND REWARDED for ignorance.