Intentional Walk Alignment

[McNulty]

I'm watching the Marlins/Mariners game. Its in extras, and there's a runner on 3rd with 1 out. The Marlins want to walk a batter to set up the double play, but the 3-0 pitch gets away. It simply tails away from the catcher allowing the runner on third to score.

Why in the world wouldn't you take a fielder and place them behind the catcher in this situation? Take 4 fielders and place them back there. You need one to hold the runner on at third, one to hold the intentionally walked batter after ball 4, and maybe another at second to stop the IBB from trying to take second after ball 4. That's 3 out of 7.

Is there some rule that all of your players have to start in fair territory? I don't get it.

[BaltimoreTerp]

I'm watching the Marlins/Mariners game. Its in extras, and there's a runner on 3rd with 1 out. The Marlins want to walk a batter to set up the double play, but the 3-0 pitch gets away. It simply tails away from the catcher allowing the runner on third to score.

Why in the world wouldn't you take a fielder and place them behind the catcher in this situation? Take 4 fielders and place them back there. You need one to hold the runner on at third, one to hold the intentionally walked batter after ball 4, and maybe another at second to stop the IBB from trying to take second after ball 4. That's 3 out of 7.

Is there some rule that all of your players have to start in fair territory? I don't get it.

I think the extremely small odds of that situation turning out that way would suggest that either a manager wouldn't feel it worthwhile, or maybe, even simpler, something like that has never happened.

[McNulty]

I think the extremely small odds of that situation turning out that way would suggest that either a manager wouldn't feel it worthwhile, or maybe, even simpler, something like that has never happened.

Right, but whats the downside? None.

[crissfan172]

I looked through the rule book and couldn't find anything that said all players have to be in fair territory, so I assume it would be legal.

[DrungoHazewood]

I looked through the rule book and couldn't find anything that said all players have to be in fair territory, so I assume it would be legal.

All fielders except the catcher must position themselves in fair territory:

Rule 4.03 When the ball is put in play at the start of, or during a game, all fielders other than

the catcher shall be on fair territory.

(a) The catcher shall station himself directly back of the plate. He may leave his

position at any time to catch a pitch or make a play except that when the batter is

being given an intentional base on balls, the catcher must stand with both feet within

the lines of the catcher’s box until the ball leaves the pitcher’s hand.

PENALTY: Balk.

(b) The pitcher, while in the act of delivering the ball to the batter, shall take his legal

position;

© Except the pitcher and the catcher, any fielder may station himself anywhere in fair

territory.

I think this rule has been there since the beginning of time, or thereabouts. It was pretty important prior to 1877, when they changed the definition of a fair ball from "any ball that hit in fair territory" to basically "any ball that stops in fair territory, or passes 1st/3rd in fair territory". Prior to that players would sometimes bunt a ball that just hit in fair territory then rolled off way into foul ground. Since the fielders all had to start in fair territory that was an almost guaranteed hit.

[DrungoHazewood]

[/veering off topic]This wouldn't be a problem if they just make the intentional walk illegal, or at least seriously disincentivized it. Again going back to the early days, walks were put into place as an incentive to make the pitcher throw pitches the batter could hit. Without some kind of penalty, or lesser penalties like 8 or 9 balls for a walk, pitchers used to just throw pitch after pitch nobody could hit (or even reach half the time) until the batter got fed up and swung anyway. By the mid-1880s they'd gone from no walks to four balls for a walk to get the freakin' pitcher to throw a pitch you could hit.

That's clearly not enough incentive in some cases. I'm in favor of changing the rules to make it a steeper penalty (say, each runner gets to move up whether forced or not). Or allowing the batter to decline the IBB, and if they walk him again (intentional or not) the next walk is two bases.

[/back on topic]

[Pedro Cerrano]

I think it makes your pitcher look bad anyway. When you don't think your pitcher is even competent enough to throw an intentional ball, things are bad.

[scOtt]

I have no problem with it, except the actual pitching. Just wave your hand, "take your base". Why waste time throwing four pitches?

[crissfan172]

All fielders except the catcher must position themselves in fair territory:

I think this rule has been there since the beginning of time, or thereabouts. It was pretty important prior to 1877, when they changed the definition of a fair ball from "any ball that hit in fair territory" to basically "any ball that stops in fair territory, or passes 1st/3rd in fair territory". Prior to that players would sometimes bunt a ball that just hit in fair territory then rolled off way into foul ground. Since the fielders all had to start in fair territory that was an almost guaranteed hit.

I thought that rule existed, but I clearly missed it while looking through the rule book.

[MikeAD]

I have no problem with it, except the actual pitching. Just wave your hand, "take your base". Why waste time throwing four pitches?

Yeah, I've always wondered why they wasted time throwing the four pitches. The manager should just come out and say we are walking him, or some other vocal/physical sign.

[DrungoHazewood]

Yeah, I've always wondered why they wasted time throwing the four pitches. The manager should just come out and say we are walking him, or some other vocal/physical sign.

There's no rule on the book saying you can do that, and baseball takes even the slightest rule change with the utmost seriousness.

I guess the pitcher could invoke one of the other rules that gives the batter an automatic ball. For example, he could lick his pitching hand four times in rapid succession, while standing on the pitcher's rubber:

8.02 The pitcher shall not—

(a) (1) Bring his pitching hand in contact with his mouth or lips while in the 18-foot

circle surrounding the pitcher’s plate, provided, however, that the pitcher may

touch his mouth or lips in that area, so long as he is not in contact with the

pitcher’s plate when doing so and so long as he clearly wipes the fingers of his

pitching hand dry before touching the pitcher’s plate. EXCEPTION:

Provided it is agreed to by both managers, the umpire prior to the start of a

game played in cold weather, may permit the pitcher to blow on his hand.

PENALTY: For violation of this part of this rule the umpires shall immediately call

a ball. However, if the pitch is made and a batter reaches first base on a hit, an error,

a hit batsman or otherwise, and no other runner is put out before advancing at least

one base, the play shall proceed without reference to the violation. Repeat offenders

shall be subject to a fine by the League President.

Although he would be trading a few seconds of gametime for a fine from the League President. Now, after 1999 the League Presidents were abolished by Czar Bud. But in an odd twist, Jackie Autry, former owner of the Angels and Gene Autry's widow, is Honorary AL President, so I guess if someone tried to speed up the game by licking their hands it would be up to her whims as to whether she would mete out an iron-fisted punishment.

That has to be the strangest paragraph I've written in a good while.

[Nite]

Well now we see why you can't just put the guy on first. The wild pitch gave a team a run. That's why they throw 4, so the one in 1000 that gets a way happens.

[MikeAD]

There's no rule on the book saying you can do that, and baseball takes even the slightest rule change with the utmost seriousness.

I know its not in the rule book, neither is instant replay on home runs but they added that recently. This isn't the UN this is a game, make the change.

[BaltimoreTerp]

I know its not in the rule book, neither is instant replay on home runs but they added that recently. This isn't the UN this is a game, make the change.

Yeah, but you see how long it took them to get instant replay on just one tiny part of the game into the rules?

[MikeAD]

Yeah, but you see how long it took them to get instant replay on just one tiny part of the game into the rules?

No I understand, I'm just saying that shouldn't be an excuse for anything.