- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Out of batters box
Posted on 5/25/24 at 10:02 pm
Posted on 5/25/24 at 10:02 pm
Just watched the replay 4 times - the batter stepped out of the batters box as the pitch was incoming. Count was Two strikes. How is that not an automatic out well before the play at the plate?
9
Posted on 5/25/24 at 10:04 pm to Bigdibber
Does the pitch end because this turns into a throw to home to stop a steal?
The reason it’s a balk is because the rule regarding that specific catchers interference (squeeze play/attempt to steal home)
The reason it’s a balk is because the rule regarding that specific catchers interference (squeeze play/attempt to steal home)
Posted on 5/25/24 at 10:04 pm to Bigdibber
Automatic out because he stepped out of the batters box? I'm assuming you are saying the pitch was a strike and inning over?
Posted on 5/25/24 at 10:05 pm to Bigdibber
Was he completely out when the pitch crossed the plate?
Which it never had a chance to cross the plate.
If he’s got a toenail on the chalk line, he’s still in the box.
Which it never had a chance to cross the plate.
If he’s got a toenail on the chalk line, he’s still in the box.
Posted on 5/25/24 at 10:05 pm to Bigdibber
If the umps saw a balk or catchers interference why didn’t they immediately call dead ball? It’s a spot call. The rule they used was correct rule but they blew the call since the catcher didn’t touch or cross the plate. The umpire action proved they didn’t see it when it allegedly happened or they would have immediately called it.
Posted on 5/25/24 at 10:08 pm to Meauxjeaux
he was out of the box
also you can't stand with a foot out and swing
also you can't stand with a foot out and swing
Posted on 5/25/24 at 10:08 pm to Meauxjeaux
quote:
The batter's legal position shall be both feet within the batter's box. Approved ruling: The lines defining the box are within the batter's box.
One toe, according to the definition isn’t “in” the batters box.
(Got this off google, be curious to hear the SEC bullshite their way out of this one)
Posted on 5/25/24 at 10:10 pm to CDawson
quote:
If the umps saw a balk
This si what me and a former MLB pitcher were going with during that sequence
Posted on 5/25/24 at 10:37 pm to Bigdibber
Because it was deemed catcher interference. In catcher interference the coach gets to decide between whether he wants the strike(which was strike 3, I believe)against his batter for leaving the box or does he want the catcher interference. He took catcher's interference and was awarded first base. You get the choice of the results of the play or the interference. The coach took the interference call naturally.
Posted on 5/25/24 at 10:43 pm to Bigdibber
Wasn’t the call a balk? Don’t think it matters what anyone does if a balk is called.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 2:33 am to Bigdibber
There are exceptions when a batter may leave the batter’s box:
Rule 7 d.1) d).
A defensive player attempts a play on a runner at ANY base.
Rule 7 d.1) d).
A defensive player attempts a play on a runner at ANY base.
This post was edited on 5/26/24 at 2:46 am
Posted on 5/26/24 at 7:15 am to 4EverATiger12345
None of the entire Ump crew had a total grip on the play. Therefore, there was zero grip on the call or any judgements.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 7:20 am to Bigdibber
If the foot is completely out of the box.
Everytime I umped behind the plate, I erased the line next to the plate. Your foot has to be completely out. Or you have to step on the plate. That line is less than 6 inches off the plate .....
Coaches were told ....That is my call and there will be no line to cause a headache from all your bitching.....
Everytime I umped behind the plate, I erased the line next to the plate. Your foot has to be completely out. Or you have to step on the plate. That line is less than 6 inches off the plate .....
Coaches were told ....That is my call and there will be no line to cause a headache from all your bitching.....
Posted on 5/26/24 at 7:27 am to Bayou
quote:
None of the entire Ump crew had a total grip on the play. Therefore, there was zero grip on the call or any judgements.
This, but they'll never admit it. They clearly thought there was no interference and called the out. The SC coach admitted he asked them while teams were swapping and then it took them an additional couple minutes to make that call.
If you're that skeptical and not 100% sure you're making the right call, then you need to let the play stand since you couldn't review it.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 7:59 am to LafTiger
quote:quote:
The batter's legal position shall be both feet within the batter's box. Approved ruling: The lines defining the box are within the batter's box.
One toe, according to the definition isn’t “in” the batters box.
(Got this off google, be curious to hear the SEC bullshite their way out of this one)
The legal definition of in the batter's box is any portion of your foot. Note the rule you quoted does not say entirely in the batter's box.
This post was edited on 5/26/24 at 8:01 am
Posted on 5/26/24 at 8:13 am to mdomingue
Bad call
Posted on 5/26/24 at 8:23 am to Bigdibber
I concede the catcher went to the plate earlier than he should have which is the standard reason for an interference call. But here is the overriding contradiction of that. BEFORE the catcher went over the plate the batter was clearly out of the batter's box. There is NO WAY you can have catcher's interference if the batter is not legally at the plate to begin with...and he was not. You can see it yourself. Go to about the 9:37 mark of this video and play it back in slow motion (.25 speed).
LINK
Also, in the postgame press conference, the SEC guy tried to act like what a hard and fast rule it was and read the rule. He then said the play wasn't appealable/able to be protested because it was a judgment call.
Which one is it?
LINK
Also, in the postgame press conference, the SEC guy tried to act like what a hard and fast rule it was and read the rule. He then said the play wasn't appealable/able to be protested because it was a judgment call.
Which one is it? This post was edited on 5/26/24 at 10:43 am
Posted on 5/26/24 at 8:32 am to kciDAtaE
quote:
Wasn’t the call a balk? Don’t think it matters what anyone does if a balk is called.
As explained later by the SEC rule guy the balk was a "catchers balk." It was called on the Neal as well as interference. The balk awarded the runner home plate (without touching it) and the interference awarded the batter first base. This is not my interpretation... straight out of the SEC rule man on the telecast. Everything was called on the catcher.
Now here is my thoughts on this after careful consideration. I see the intent of the rule is in case of a hit and run or suicide squeeze play and keeps the catcher from interfering with the pitch to the batter. However this is where the issue comes up that the batter vacated the batters box and making this a straight up steal. Also if Herring detected the steal he could have stepped off the rubber and threw home for a non-pitch.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 8:37 am to mdomingue
quote:
The legal definition of in the batter's box is any portion of your foot. Note the rule you quoted does not say entirely in the batter's box.
If the batter has one foot out of the BB he is out of the box. This was the rule enforced to keep batters from erasing the back chalk line and getting more depth in the box.
Posted on 5/26/24 at 8:39 am to NotaStarGazer
quote:
BEFORE the catcher went over the plate the batter was clearly out of the batter's box. There is NO WAY you can have catcher's interference if the batter is not legally at the plate to begin with...and he was not. You can see it yourself.
Neal moved to the plate while the batter was still in the box. It all happens so fast that the batter is in the box at the release of the pitch, but he is out by the time Neal is fully over the plate. The batter can leave the box if a defensive player is making a play at a base. I'm no ump, but I don't think this is an automatic strike. And I have no idea why everyone is arguing this point. Neal didn't touch home until he had the ball and the original call of the runner being out is the only thing that should matter. The was reversed and that is the only relevant thing.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News