Talk:Uncaught third strike

Scoring the Play

The article should mention that when the batter reaches base, the advance is attributed to a passed ball charged to the catcher, unless the batter swung and missed a very bad pitch, in which case a wild pitch may be charged to the pitcher. Now and again, the scorer charges an error instead, as when the catcher makes a bad throw to first. WHPratt (talk) 15:16, 24 April 2009 (UTC) It used to be an error all the time: check the famous Mickey Owen gaffe in an old World Series -- no passed ball there. The passed ball/wild pitch scoring was legitimized sometime in the 1960s. The older rule makes more sense. Passed balls and wild pitches were created in recognition of the fact that the battery men handle the ball far more often than the other seven fielders. They shouldn't be charged with errors for mistakes on pitches, as they aren't credited for their successful handling of most pitches. However, the third strike is a fielding play. WHPratt (talk) 13:20, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

A wild pitch could be within the strike zone so that it could be a called strike. Pitchers can throw the wrong pitch -- a low, outside-corner sinkerball when the catcher calls for and expects a high, in-tight fastball, or vice-versa. The wild pitch could be a called strike if the catcher obviously set up for one pitch gets something very different. This also applies to erratic knuckleball and "lob" pitches.Pbrower2a (talk) 15:36, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

A catcher or first baseman could get an error on the play -- if the catcher's throw to first base is wild or if the first baseman fumbles the ball, thus denying a wild pitch or a passed ball. Such is unlikely because the catcher ordinarily has time in which to make an easy throw.

"Uncaught"

Is "uncaught" even a word? I've never heard it used in any situation, let alone as a baseball term. I've always heard it referred to as a "dropped third strike", which the article does state is inaccurate. I think it would help to give a source for the "accurate" name of this term. Ksy92003 (talk) 02:41, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Indeed it is a word. Programmers hear it quite frequently (as in "uncaught exception")... -- DevSolar (talk) 09:13, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Clarification on type of uncaught third strike

An uncaught ball on either a swinging third strike or called third strike with first base unoccupied or with first base occupied with two outs shall provide opportunity for the batter to become a runner.

An uncaught ball on a swinging third strike which hits the batter is considered an out. Source: Buster Posey, catcher and Jon Miller, announcer, 07/19/10, Giants vs. Dodgers. Batter swung at third strike which hit the dirt, and then hit the batter. Batter called out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.141.115.122 (talk) 05:45, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

When a pitch hits a batter, the ball is dead (play is suspended). As one consequence of that, the batter is out in the above situation because he cannot advance to first base while play is suspended. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justus R (talk • contribs) 15:23, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

But what if the pitch bounds off the catcher or the umpire and then hits the batter? Pbrower2a (talk) 15:51, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Abuse of the rule possible?

Example: 0 outs, 0 on bases, count is 0-2 and the pitcher delivers a very bad pitch. Can the batter swing and try to the first base? I mean slightly after the pitch is gone, when he sees that uncaught third strike gets him to first, while not swinging only adds one ball to the count. 87.95.210.191 (talk) 03:59, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Nothing in the rules prohibits swinging at a bad pitch. Unless the pitch were spectacularly wild, it would be quite risky for the batter, as with any kind of recovery at all, the catcher will still throw him out. If the batter waits until the ball bounces into the stands or dugout, the umpire will have called it a "ball" by then and the swing would be invalid, I suspect. WHPratt (talk) 14:38, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Bases loaded, two outs, uncaught third strike and fielders' choice

I saw the play. In a game in June 2011 involving the Detroit Tigers on defense, the Tigers faced a situation in which the bases were loaded and two were out. Alex Avila did not catch a third strike immediately but gathered it and stepped on home plate, forcing a baserunner from third base. The baserunner was called out on a fielder's choice (that was the easiest play available) and the inning was over.

I can imagine a slightly-different scenario. The pitcher throws what would otherwise be a wild pitch or passed ball in a two-out, bases-loaded situation. The pitcher (no other fielder could do this) runs to home plate, and after the catcher gets the errant pitch he throws to the pitcher who then steps on home plate and catches the ball before the runner from third would reach home. This too would be a fielder's choice and a strikeout. Pbrower2a (talk) 17:36, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

There have been plays wherein the catcher mishandled the third strike and, say, the third baseman ended up throwing the batter out at first (K 5-3). Retrosheet.org has a few of these on it list of unusual plays. I once saw a televised game wherein the defense pegged the ball around the infield after a strikeout and only then realized that the firstbaseman had to touch the bag. But as the batter went directly to the dugout, it was not scored K 2-5-6-4-3. WHPratt (talk) 16:05, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

I didn't think of that. The usual muffed third strike goes behind the catcher or stays close to him and does not bound toward the pitcher or an infielder. In such a case one could have a strikeout with the fielder (third baseman, pitcher, or first baseman) makes a throw to someone at first base. For example if the first baseman fields the muffed third strike (probably on a play in which a bunt is expected but the play becomes a called or swinging third strike) and throws to the second baseman covering first base it could be a K 3-4 play. Such may have happened some time in Little League, for all that I know.Pbrower2a (talk) 02:21, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

It also depends upon whether the batter-baserunner is called out at home plate or at first base. It is easy to imagine such a play in the unlikely event that the batter feigns a return to the dugout and then makes a mad dash for first base during a lackadaisical peg-around play. That would be possible only if the dugout is on the first-base side of the infield (if the dugout is on the third-base side, then running toward it would be a run toward third base and an automatic out, putout credited to the catcher). A wise catcher would not make a throw to the third baseman until the batter is called out, and a wise third baseman would be alert to anyone running to first.

The scenario that you saw would have been a putout by the catcher with no assists because the batter abandoned all effort to reach first base. The fielder closest to the play, in this case the catcher, would get the putout. The same would apply if the batter went back to the dugout after what he assumed was a third strike but was not. Pbrower2a (talk) 23:20, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Here's one for the ages: From Retrosheet's Strange-and-Unusual Log:

"How about a strikeout with the batter being retired 767? In the game of April 25, 1970, Tiger pitcher Earl Wilson struck out to end the seventh inning in the Twin Cities. Or so it appeared to everyone except Detroit third base coach Grover Resinger. He saw that Twins catcher Paul Ratliff trapped the pitch in the dirt, did not tag Wilson and rolled the ball to the mound. Resinger told Wilson to start running as most of the Twins entered the dugout. Earl got to first easily and headed for second. Since no one interfered with him, he started for third. By this time, Brant Alyea, who was trotting in from left field, heard Resinger shouting at Wilson. Alyea hustled to the mound but had trouble picking up the ball. Wilson headed for home where Twins Leo Cardenas and Ratliff had returned. Alyea finally picked up the ball and threw to Cardenas. Wilson turned back to third but was tagged out by Alyea for a K767. Rookie catcher Ratliff was charged with an error. After the game, Detroit catcher Bill Freehan said "If Alyea had been hustling, Earl might have made it [home]. Tell him [Alyea] to start coming in and off the field a little quicker." The aftermath of the story is that Wilson pulled a hamstring muscle running the bases and had to leave the game."

Retrieved by WHPratt (talk) 19:18, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

In that case (and I saw the game on television) a three-base error to the catcher is appropriate scoring for making what proved a wild throw because the pitcher was no longer on the mound. Catchers can get errors for bad throws to the pitcher with at least one runner on base that allows at least one baserunner to advance at least a base without another being put out. Such is not specific to a strikeout. Such is a rare error, but I have seen it in major-league play. The ball thrown back to the pitcher is not a dead ball, and if it sails into centerfield, the catcher is responsible. After all, the catcher gets a putout or an at least easy assist on almost any strikeout. Pbrower2a (talk) 05:29, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

T-ball

The article mentions that a batter would be out on a dropped third strike. Unless T-ball has changed considerably since my kids played, there is no such thing as a dropped or uncaought third strike; they are hitting the ball off a tee, hence the name. I sort of think that in fact the idea of a strike in not a part of T-ball; players swing until they hit the ball. Wschart (talk) 23:58, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Reading that made me scratch my head, too. It is tempting to rewrite those last two sentences in that paragraph for cleanup, and leave the T-ball out of it. Huw Powell (talk) 02:26, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

dumb it down please!

i can't for the life of me understand this article. so despite scoring the 3d out of an inning, the batter is "grandfathered in" to complete a run around the bases? that the idea?

and if he doesn't make it he gets a DOUBLE out? one for the first wiff, and one for the tag at first?

worse yet, top of article says rule only applies if no one is ON first; later down it says only applies if someone IS there. which is it?!

and how do u get to FIVE outs in an inning? even theoretically. once the last guy gets his TWO outs (outs 3 and 4), is not the inning FINALLY over?! or are we talking about other runners also being tagged out? in which case, 5 outs on this one play are possible, right? (bases loaded at start) for a maximum 7 OUT INNING?

do i have that right? 66.30.47.138 (talk) 06:37, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

I think you've misunderstood the concept. On an uncaught third strike, the batter is credited with a strikeout, the pitcher is credited with a strikeout, but there is no out recorded in the game. The batter may attempt to advance to first base under the criteria specified (no runner on first base; or, with a runner on first base and two outs). With no runner on first, the defending team must put out that runner by tagging or by force play (that is, catcher throws to first baseman, who steps on first base before the batter-runner). With a runner on base, the defending team may put out any runner by force out. If the defending team is successful, an out is then recorded for the game, otherwise the batter is safe at first base (or second etc, if s/he managed to advance that far on the play).

With respect to "five outs", what this is saying is that the team on offense has been lucky, such that what should have been a third out actually grants the team another at bat, in the same way that an error would. (Or likewise, that the pitcher has had to record more outs in the inning than necessary.) This could hypothetically continue ad infinitum. Mindmatrix 13:17, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

oh wow, that changes everything! article at present definitely implies there IS a strikeout, despite all this follow-on action.

what does it actually mean, tho, the batter "records a strikeout"? just in his stats?

a better wording up top would be something along the lines of "...technically strikes out, but for the sake of the game, it does not count", no?

not the impression one gets at present.

also doesn't help that the quote setting it all up uses "hand-out" with any sort of translation! what's a hand-out?!

context would dictate it just means strikeout, but given the word "hand" in there, it sounds more like it should mean a "tag". 66.30.47.138 (talk) 01:38, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Incorrect Reason For Rule Here

The logic in this article for the reason this rule exist is illogical. The possibility of the catcher purposely dropping a 3rd strike to get a double or triple play would not exist if the rule did not exist. If the rule did not exist there is no possibility to purposely drop a 3rd strike and achieve anything, the batter is simply out and not a runner. The reason this rule exist is outlined below: The reason the rule exist is to prevent the team in the field from putting the catcher in the field as an additional defender. There are a few situations that having no catcher catching the pitched ball would enable the catcher to relocate to any spot on the field. 1. If there were 3 balls, 2 strikes, and 2 outs on a batter, you would not need a catcher because the pitched ball will either be strike 3, ball 4, or batted into play. In this situation the catcher could be moved from behind the plate into the field as an extra defender. 2. With no runners on base the same applies as 1 above, the defensive team would not need a catcher. If you look at the rule as currently written, both scenerios above fall exactly into prevention of. No runners on first or 2 outs. I have spent over 20 years evaluating this rule. My grandfather and I discussed it many times, and his grandfather had told him these are the reasons for the rule. In early days of town all the umpire often stood behind the pitcher and the catcher would play the field in the situations I have described. Again, this articles reason for the rule is wrong. If the rule were elimated, this articles reason for it's existence would also be eliminated. 2600:1014:B027:9E73:E831:7EF0:D1A4:86BA (talk) 22:56, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

It's true that when there are no baserunners, and with fewer than two strikes on the batter, the catcher is rather superfluous, effectively reduced to a spectator. You'll often see a major league catcher slouch behind the plate and make a lackadaisical effort to catch the ball with one hand, as it doesn't matter whether he catches it or not. However, the rule book does require that the catcher set up in the "catcher's box" behind the plate. Therefore, no other rule is required to prevent the catcher from playing in fair territory in cases where the receiving the pitch doesn't matter.

Some expert on 19th century baseball explained the rationale to me once. The philosophy was that a batter got three chances to put the ball in play, and if he failed to do so, the ball was effectively in play at that point. If the catcher caught the pitch cleanly, he was out. If not, he had to be tagged or thrown out. It's sort of quaint and nostalgic, but I'm surprised that it has stayed in the rule book this long. Early on they had to modify the rule to prevent double play situations when first base was occupied. WHPratt (talk) 16:49, 17 September 2023 (UTC)