- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
re: What’s your opinion on the called intentional hit by pitch
Posted on 6/22/25 at 7:07 am to Meatball
Posted on 6/22/25 at 7:07 am to Meatball
The batter's box belongs to the batter. No matter if he sticks his arm out or not as long as the pitch is within the box and he gets hit it's a free trip to first imo.
0
Posted on 6/22/25 at 7:07 am to Penrod
quote:
If he remained still he would not have been hit (He would have drawn a walk, though). He moved his elbow down to draw the contact.
Why would he intentionally get hit on ball four? Him getting hit and not getting hit has the same results. It creates a poor application of the rule that needs to be adjusted. A player can not benefit from intentionality drawing contact on ball four.
This post was edited on 6/22/25 at 7:08 am
Posted on 6/22/25 at 7:11 am to Meatball
I thought one of their guys kinda leaned into one earlier.
Posted on 6/22/25 at 7:12 am to Seeker
quote:
Why would he intentionally get hit on ball four?
Good question. But if he wanted to avoid getting hit he would have easily done so.
Posted on 6/22/25 at 7:16 am to Penrod
quote:
But if he wanted to avoid getting hit he would have easily done so.
That’s dumb. If the pitcher wanted to avoid him on first base, he wouldn’t have thrown into the batters box.
Again I don’t mind the rule, but in this particular scenario it is a poor application of the rule that needs to be adjusted.
Posted on 6/22/25 at 7:17 am to Meatball
It’s a bad rule especially on a 3-2 count
Posted on 6/22/25 at 7:19 am to Meatball
I don't like calls where a third party determines "intent". I loathe overturning calls that determines intent.
Had the call been made on the field that he leaned into it, I might disagree but overturning that call was bullshite.
Had the call been made on the field that he leaned into it, I might disagree but overturning that call was bullshite.
Posted on 6/22/25 at 7:20 am to Meatball
I thought it was bs.They never call these and he did not step into it.
Posted on 6/22/25 at 7:23 am to Meatball
Batter has the right to stay in the batters box.. if the pitch is inside why wouldn’t a batter flinch or try and protect himself.. he has the right to be in the batters box.. so now every pitch thrown inside the batters box is going to b reviewed to see if the batter made a move.. such BS.. if you’re in the batters box and the pitcher throws at your head you’re not going to make an attempt to get out the way?.. they said Dickenson lowered his shoulder into the ball.. BS.. he lowered his shoulder to protect himself, you didn’t see him stick his elbow a mile out to get hit.. they definitely need to change the rule … and it shouldn’t be called a strike either, if anything have the batter return to the batters box and call it a dead pitch if it’s obvious he tried to get hit…
Posted on 6/22/25 at 7:23 am to graychef
Of all the rules that needs to be changed. If it’s ball 4, regardless it should be a walk.
Posted on 6/22/25 at 7:23 am to Meatball
I think it should be an umpire’s discretion call and not reviewable, one. I also think they could easily add an exception on what would be ball four. The batter gains no advantage by being hit in that situation and as such it shouldn’t be a penalty.
Posted on 6/22/25 at 8:07 am to Meatball
The rule should be you if the pitch crosses into the batters box then no matter what HBP. If not then it’s a strike.
Is there an over head view of the play? I was listening in the car.
Is there an over head view of the play? I was listening in the car.
Posted on 6/22/25 at 8:28 am to GeauxGutsy
Terrible call. Ball was way inside. Not even debatable.
Posted on 6/22/25 at 10:10 am to Seeker
quote:
I don’t mind the rule, but in this particular scenario it is a poor application of the rule that needs to be adjusted.
I agree. But he saw where the ball was coming and he froze. Then he adjusted down with his elbow so that he was sure it would get hit. If he wanted that ball to miss him, he would've easily backed away and avoided it. And if you don't think so, then you're the dummy.
Posted on 6/22/25 at 10:14 am to Penrod
quote:this isn’t dodgeball.
Good question. But if he wanted to avoid getting hit he would have easily done so.
He was hbp. Period. It isn’t the batters job to get out of the way. It is the pitchers job to not hit them.
Posted on 6/22/25 at 10:17 am to Meatball
He was turning away from the ball and the elbow dropped as a result.
Guidelines for reviews need to be changed to say that if the batter makes a move that is obviously to have the ball hit him, then he’s out. Otherwise he’s on base.
Posted on 6/22/25 at 10:19 am to Meatball
Posted on 6/22/25 at 11:15 am to weaveballs1
quote:
I try to be fairly neutral with calls like that and it was clearly bullshite. So strange that these umps have all of the sudden starting calling clear HBPs as outs during the CWS
They've clearly made it a point of emphasis this year.
Posted on 6/22/25 at 11:21 am to Meatball
BS call.
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News