If there are bases loaded and a drop third strike occurs doesn't the catcher just have to step on the plate to force the runner on third out?

 

If I am remembering correctly, when you have a drop third strike with the bases loaded the batter is entitled to first base.

 

edit: i found the rule, the batter is automatically out because first base is occupied and there are less than two outs. If there were two outs and the above happened then the catcher could just step on home.

Edited August 4, 200520 yr by marsh

If there are bases loaded and a drop third strike occurs doesn't the catcher just have to step on the plate to force the runner on third out?

 

If I am remembering correctly, when you have a drop third strike with the bases loaded the batter is entitled to first base.

 

edit: i found the rule, the batter is automatically out because first base is occupied and there are less than two outs. If there were two outs and the above happened then the catcher could just step on home.

Yes that is all he had to do, he probably forgot that bases were loaded and tried to get him in a run down

Yes that is all he had to do, he probably forgot that bases were loaded and tried to get him in a run down

 

I have to admit that if I were in Barrett's situation I’d probably do the same thing as he did. Its kind of confusing when you see the replay, but once you think about it, it’s not all that hard.

I have to admit that if I were in Barrett's situation I’d probably do the same thing as he did. Its kind of confusing when you see the replay, but once you think about it, it’s not all that hard.

 

There is just no excuse for that. Even in softball we always are telling each other what base to go to if we get the ball. You have just got to expect the ball to get hit to you every play, and know what to do with it.

What I'm curious about is this.

 

You're allowed to take out the catcher more than you're allowed to take out other fielders because he basically wears armor. But on that play, the pitcher was covering home plate. Would Rollins have been allowed to take him out with the full force available to him?

 

Edit: Pretend it wasn't a force.

Edited August 4, 200520 yr by Antonio Osuna

that was actually ruled as "rollins stealing home". At least that's what it said on sportsline.com

Edited August 4, 200520 yr by White Sox Josh

that was actually ruled as "rollins stealing home".  At least that's what it said on sportsline.com

 

They ended up changing it to a passed ball on barrett.

What I'm curious about is this.

 

You're allowed to take out the catcher more than you're allowed to take out other fielders because he basically wears armor. But on that play, the pitcher was covering home plate. Would Rollins have been allowed to take him out with the full force available to him?

 

Edit: Pretend it wasn't a force.

 

If the pitcher was blocking the plate yes.....