That isn't waht the rulebook says:

The rulebook also says this, which addresses this subject more directly:

(b) The official scorer shall not credit a base hit when a:

(1) runner is forced out by a batted ball, or would have been forced out except for a fielding error;

No exceptions for where the ball is hit.

Moreover, a fair grounder can be interpreted to mean any batted ball in fail territory that touches the ground, rather than the common usage as an infield ground ball.

there's still nothing good that can come from going home, while something bad can

This is in the situation described in #40: Pittsburgh at Detroit, top of the 9th, one out, man on third, Tigers up by two. The Pirate batter hit a fly that was caught, and the runner from third scored after the catch

Logically speaking, Detroit doesn't care about that run or runner, but Pittsburgh might. Let's say the runner holds at third. The next batter walks, and then there's a long fly to the warning track, and the runner on third for some moronic reason holds his ground and the runner on first, properly going on contact, passes him on the bases for the third out while the ball meanwhile falls in play. Or, I don't know, the next batter scorches a ball down the 3B line that hits the runner on third for the third out. It seems to me that if the guy can score easily, he should get off the bases and on the scoreboard.

The next batter walks, and then there's a long fly to the warning track, and the runner on third for some moronic reason holds his ground and the runner on first, properly going on contact, passes him on the bases for the third out while the ball meanwhile falls in play. Or, I don't know, the next batter scorches a ball down the 3B line that hits the runner on third for the third out.

I think the chances of getting called out for leaving early (regardless whether you did), or stumbling between third and home or some other bad result vastly exceed the chances of some future runner passing you between home and first due to genuinely monumental stupidity. And if you're on third and not taking your lead in foul territory, you deserve whatever horrible fate you suffer. (-:

Obviously if the ball is deep enough where the runner can trot home, there's very little risk to tagging up and scoring. Then again, there's absolutely no downside to the Tiger outfielder taking a shot to try to gun the guy out at the plate.

Along those lines, I've often wondered why, in the runner-on-first, ninth-inning lead-by-two-or-more situation, the opposing team doesn't try a play to catch the guy taking off for second. I'd love to see a catcher fire the ball to an uncovered second base, with the centerfielder charging. If the defense gets lucky, maybe the baserunner makes a play for third, and the defending team has a free crack at a no-downside out on the bases.

I've often wondered why, in the runner-on-first, ninth-inning lead-by-two-or-more situation, the opposing team doesn't try a play to catch the guy taking off for second. I'd love to see a catcher fire the ball to an uncovered second base, with the centerfielder charging. If the defense gets lucky, maybe the baserunner makes a play for third, and the defending team has a free crack at a no-downside out on the bases.

Yeah, I've seen that play work in a high school game once or twice. You'd like to think that major leaguers might have a bit more awareness of what's going on around them than that.

Yeah, I've seen that play work in a high school game once or twice. You'd like to think that major leaguers might have a bit more awareness of what's going on around them than that.

They probably would, but there's genuinely no harm in trying (you'd probably want to pick the optimal conditions to try it out, for instance two-run lead, aggressive baserunner on first, centerfielder with non-Damonesque arm).

* Bunts dropped down with the hope of getting a base hit, but that result in an out at first and an advanced runner would also result in an at bat.

Isn't that the current rule already?

Isn't that the current rule already?

Yes, though it's not universally applied.

#50 -- Clearly you're right on the extra base thing.

But a ground ball to Ichiro is still a ground ball ... and we all know that it is possible to ground out to the RF by getting thrown out at first. Heck, put a couple of Molinas on base ahead of him and Ichiro can probably turn a 9-5-4 double play on that ball. :-)

One issue a lefty catcher has to overcome is that most hitters (especially on the non-MLB level) bat right-handed, and therefore provide an obstacle to the catcher when throwing to secondbase on stolen base attempts.

DB

With the number of lefty and switch hitters in MLB this is as much of an issue for righty catchers as it would be for lefties.

Wow. There are a LOT more amateur lefty catchers out there than I thought. And you guys have lefty catcher's mitts? I've never even SEEN one. I used a 1B mitt. Also, I have a weak arm, although it's accurate, so I found that, for throwing to second, it was best if I just set up on one knee before the pitch, rather than actually crouching. Crouching took ALL the speed out of my throws, and also ran the danger of getting involved with a righty batter. Throwing from the knee was much better, and, because I never moved my feet or body core, I had no troubles throwing to second. Almost no one at my level of play ever tried to steal third, so I didn't have to confront that problem. But I imagine that, the first time I just turned on my knee and fired the ball to third, the batter would get out of the way, rag arm that I have.

Also, thinking about it, I agree with Walt. I can't remember an announcer refer to the advance to second on the throw home as a fielder's choice, although that's clearly what the rulebook calls it.

BTW, if you're looking for Bill James' comment on lefty catchers in the Historical Abstract, it's in the Jack Clement article in the 100 best catchers section. Clement was an 1800s catcher, and Bill was commenting on the oddity that he's been the only lefty catcher in MLB of any tenure.

the best high school catcher i ever saw was left-handed. he also batted third and when i chatted with his coach we discussed how shortstop wasn't an option and his talent would not be as valuable in centerfield as it would be at catcher and since he had been catching since little league let him stay there.

he was some player. he got a scholarship to play at oshkosh but got hurt in american legion ball and i don't think every played for the titans. and how did he get hurt? playing outfield.

Also, thinking about it, I agree with Walt. I can't remember an announcer refer to the advance to second on the throw home as a fielder's choice, although that's clearly what the rulebook calls it.

They also don't refer to catcher's indifference as a fielder's choice, but it's clearly that as well.

There's also a play that would go down as a FC that isn't directly noted above. One out, speedy winning run on third, ground ball to the third baseman (or SS), who looks/chases runner back rather than take easy out at first (and risk the runner scoring). Even without throw or true attempt to put out runner at third, I believe that should still be ruled an fielder's choice on the batter. The batter only reached base because of a choice made by the fielding team, even if that choice was to do nothing.

bill was clearly thinking of brewers of 1978-1982 where guys like thomas, ogilvie, and molitor were added to cooper and yount

That's probably right, Harvey, but what he said was 1980, which clearly isn't correct. We can't be sure if he meant 1978 or whether he was thinking about the trade that happened after the 1980 season, which actually added more pitching than hitting to the team (Fingers and Vuckovich in addition to Ted Simmons). Perhaps someone will ask him to clarify.

The big gain in '78 came from the outfielders; Molitor didn't hit much at age 21. (Don Money had hit well playing 2B for the Brewers in '77, though the overall figures at the position don't look that swift because Lenn Sakata hit .165 there for a third of a season.) To say he was "a banger" would be a stretch, at least at that exact moment in time. That also includes the signing of Larry Hisle, who had a big year in '78 but couldn't stay healthy thereafter. Thomas made an adjustment at AAA in '77 and was able to parlay it into a career as a solid AAAA slugger for 4-5 years after that, so it's one of those scenarios where just about everything fell into place. Yount and Sixto Lezcano also blossomed after having started on the "pre-banger" team in the mid-70s. The Brewers gained 165 runs from 1977-78, which is a good bit more than the Red Sox gained from 2002-03.

The batter only reached base because of a choice made by the fielding team, even if that choice was to do nothing

A fielder's choice was also recorded on a play during the 1990s where Todd Zeile mistakenly tried to record a force at third base when there was no runner on first base (and thus there was no force play at third). As the rule says, you only need an intent to put out a preceding runner, even if it's only a mistaken intent. Or as Bill James once said "it doesn't have to be a good choice or a bad choice, it just has to be a choice."

I've always believed that, given no iterference from the rulebook, scoring naturally trends down as defence continually catches up to offense.

Whether that has actually happened depends on interpretation. If you look at all of history, you see plenty of periods of huge offense. If you look at just the "modern era", when the leagues have stabalized, are fully integrated and done merging, I think it is a more clear trend. The important part is figuring out when that is due to rules changes and what is "natural".

Any of you guys want to help annotate the major rules changes on these charts?

I also threw from my knees - found I was more accurate doing that and taking a smidge off my throws than in coming up from a crouch (at the time, I had a strong, inaccurate arm). Going to third, I'd pivot and lean back in one motion to create a throwing lane (sometimes falling down in the process) - looked goofy but was effective.
Never saw a lefty catcher's mitt until my early 20s.

***

zach/65, I don't think there's an equilibrium or natural state/tendency - just actions and reactions.

Ichiro is better off letting the ball clang off his glove That way an error is charged, Hamilton records and AB

No, probably not. The official scorer would probably award Hamilton with a SF in this instance if he believes that the run would have scored anyway.