I’m not really seeing a lot of bats that the batter throws accidentally, but it does seem that a lot more bats are breaking and ending up in the stands or nearly decapitating an infielder.
Yup. Has anybody in this thread proposed banning maple bats? I’d support that if they can’t figure out a way to keep them from shattering so freaking often.
Yes, because running more than 3’ outside the base path* to avoid a tag *means you’re out, period. The rule is silent on whether the fielder actually makes a tag, attempts to make a tag, or is even capable of making a tag.
Apples and oranges. Here’s the reason. Because three strikes and you’re out. The catcher does not have to catch the ball for it to be called a strike. On an *uncaught *third strike (I stand corrected) the pitcher is credited with a strikeout, but it does not put an out on the board. How can we call this an out and not an out at the same time?
Sorry, I read your post again and realized your question was rhetorical,:o but anyway there’s the answer for anyone who cares but didn’t already know.
Changng sports from recent posts: I would like to see football (soccer) adopt two rules from rugby after an offence:
[ul]
[li]if a free kick is awarded and the defending team does not immediately retreat the full ten yards, they lose another ten yards[/li][li]the referee can play on for a while to see if the non-offending team gains advatnage, and then still award the foul if they do not[/li][/ul]
Because it simply doesn’t serve a purpose. It’s a technicality that would allow a team to score a run due to their baserunners making mistakes.
You might have misunderstood my point. I’m not suggesting they make it so you can’t get the fourth out and have to allow the run to score; I’m suggesting the run should never score. The rule would be easy to adjust and would simplify the rulebook; simply say that in a situation where the third out is made by a runner being doubled off for leaving early, no run can score. Just like a force out.
Until the ball is caught, the putout has not been made. Other than the infield fly rule, there is no case in baseball where a putout is recorded when the ball has been dropped.
Forget the “point of the rule” – which is solely your own interpretation. The actual rule is “The defense must have possession of the ball to record the out.” The only exception is in order to prevent a deliberately dropped ball to get an easy double play.
Because on any other pitch, there is no putout. The stipulation that the batter can’t advance if there’s a man on first is for the same reason as the infield fly rule: to prevent the defense from deliberately dropping the ball to get an easy double play.
Sure you are, but that’s no different than if the pitcher drops the ball after the first baseman tosses it to him after making the out. The ballplayer is out when he runs out of the base path, so dropping the ball occurs after the play is over.
And so one could argue that the batter should be out as soon as the third strike crosses the plate, so dropping the ball occurs after the play is over.
The pitcher is credited with a strikeout. However, he is not credited with a putout, which is what really counts as far as outs are concerned.
Of course, it’s the catcher who gets the putout. So if an uncaught third strike is an out, the catcher gets a putout* without cleanly catching the ball. Again, with the exception of the infield fly rule, there is no other case where you can get a putout while dropping the ball.
*Remember, every out must have a putout.
Not quite; there’s also interference, e.g. A-Rod slapping the ball out of Arroyo’s glove. I assume somebody gets credit for a putout there, too.
The play isn’t over until the ball is caught. That’s the case with every other putout in baseball where the defense catches the ball*.
In addition, the umpire must call the strike, which isn’t done until the ball reaches the catcher.
*Barring the infield fly rule, running out of the basepath, live ball touching a baserunner, etc.
So why can’t a strikeout be called the same way as the exceptions you have listed?
Yes, someone does. It goes to the person who is interfered with. But that’s beside the point.
Because the only relevant exception is the infield fly rule, where a defender can deliberately drop the ball to gain advantage. Other than that (and the rule takes the possibility into account), a dropped third strike is no different from any other dropped ball by a defender – it’s not an out.
Well, there doesn’t seem to be a lot of love for the dropped third strike. I kind of like it, because the greatest play in White Sox history (A.J. Pierzynski running to first base during the 2005 ALCS) was a dropped third strike.
In fact, I’d like to extend it further, by restoring the possibility even where it doesn’t apply–with a runner on first and less than two out. Of course, that’s a force situation, and you can’t allow the defense to make a double play.
So you call a dead ball any time you execute a force out after a dropped third strike, and the batter is automatically awarded first. In certain situations the defense could take advantage of this to replace a fast base-runner with a slow batter–so be it, this would add another element of strategy to the game. (Although you can do this on pop-ups today, and nobody ever does.)
I would shit-can the infield fly in the same manner–the only stipulation needs to be that the defense can’t record two force-outs on an infield fly. One force-out, and the ball is dead. Other than that, play on.
I suppose you might be right, but I don’t think it takes away from the game. The job of the defense is to get an out. However a runner would (should?) only be trapped if he doesn’t realize this particular play could happen.
I’d appreciate it if you could find a cite or a youtube video of this phenomonon, or even other dopers who concur. I’m not trying to prove you wrong, I’m just saying I haven’t seen it. I see broken bats go into the stands, but I don’t recall ever seeing a baseball player throw a bat into the stands.
Not even this immortal pic? 
Football (soccer): treat diving players like match fixers and other scum; have them banned for life. See how many little tarts go down like they’ve stood on a mine after a few of them get banned.
You’re arguing that players aren’t out until the ball is caught… except for a multitude of situations where players are out even if the ball isn’t caught.
The entire point of saying that the dropped third strike rule sucks is that we believe the third strike should be one of the situations where possession of the ball isn’t necessary, rather than one of the situations where possession is necessary.
Clearly there is nothing about the game play that requires a caught ball in order for there to be an out, because of the number of situations that do not require it.