Did you know that in the official rules of Major League Baseball, the “swing” is not defined?  That’s right, one of the basic tenants of the game is basically left unexplained.  I’ll borrow a 2019 quote from Matt Snyder of CBS sports:

“Now, for decades and decades, fans, players, media, umpires alike have come to accept a general idea of what constitutes a swing (“did he go?”), but it’s not defined in the rulebook. We can talk about breaking wrists or the head of the bat clearing home plate or the barrel passing by the front of the body, but all of these ideas came about through generally accepted word of mouth. None of them have ever been officially defined by Major League Baseball.”

For the most part, there’s not much controversial about this, at least when the player is taking a full swing at the pitch.  Questions come up, however, on a “check swing”.  In baseball, a “check” swing is a partial or aborted attempt by a batter to swing at a pitched ball. It happens when the batter initially begins the swinging motion but then stops before fully committing to the swing. The purpose of a check swing is usually to avoid swinging at a pitch that the batter decides is not hittable or outside the strike zone. If the swing is successfully checked, meaning it’s deemed “not a swing” by the umpire(s), it’s up to the home plate umpire to decide if the ball is a strike or a ball based on the location of the pitch.    Conversely, if the umpire(s) determines that the swing wasn’t checked and the player attempted a swing, it’s a strike if the ball was not hit. 

To make things a little more controversial, the home plate umpire will often not make the decision on whether a “check” swing was an actual swing.  He will often assume the player did not swing, and call a strike or ball based on the location of the pitch.  Then the catcher can appeal to the first base umpire (for right handed batters) or the third base umpire (for left handed batters).  The logic here is that these umpires have a better view to determine if a swing was attempted.   I know what you’re thinking, how can these umpires, 90 feet away, have a better view?   The answer is that they have a better angle to determine if the bat crossed the plate. But hold on! The rules of baseball do NOT define a swing as the bat crossing the plate!  Thus we have an ironic twist that obviously leads to controversy. 

There was actually a MLB playoff game a few years ago that was decided by the first base umpire.  5 game series tied 2 to 2.  9^th inning, one run game.  The losing team had the tying run on base, 2 outs, and the batter had 2 strikes. The batter checked his swing, the home plate umpire called a ball, no swing. The catcher appealed to the first base umpire, who called a strike. Game over. To the naked eye, was there a significant difference between this check swing and others called “no swing”?  Honestly, not at all.   On virtually all check swings that are called “no swing”, the bat almost always enters the vertical space above the plate.  So that is not really a criteria. That’s the basic problem, there is no criteria. 

I’m not a baseball expert, so I am not going to propose a new rule here.   But it does seem that more experienced baseball minds can come up with a rule that is easier to understand and easier to judge.

MLB has been surprisingly open to rule changes:  the new pitch time limits, outlawing the shift, the designated runner in extra innings.   So here’s hoping. Or just ask the batter…..he knows!