The Unofficial Furman Football Page

Paladins down 5-2 in the 9th rallied for 2 runs and had runners at first and second and still no outs. Guess what we do next? Yep the old bunt with a good hitter, Jake Crawford at the plate. After he fouls it off for strike 2, he bunts again and whiffs and rally is officially killed yet again and Paladins lose 5-4. This one is again on Harker.

Yep, bad idea

I was dumbfounded. I did not think Brett was as married to the %^#$ bunt as was his predecessor. OK, first four guys get on, two runs in, now down 5-4 with the damned CLEANUP hitter at the plate, nobody out. Was it OK to bunt here with someone who prolly does not practice it much or well? Maybe. Was it OK to bunt with 2 strikes? HELL NO. He made a pass at a ball that was high and nearly a foot outside, strike 3. Now even if he had gotten it down, successfully, that would be 1 out, runners on 2nd and 3rd. Now they will OF COURSE walk hitter #5 to get a force everywhere and we put the game in the hands of #6 and #7. This was a brain fart of significant value.
While I'm here, have they change the rule such that a batted ball is foul if it strikes home plate?? Seriously?? This call has been made in the last two games I have attended. Kinda renders the Baltimore Chop useless as a strategy. And it was a game changer this time.

I don't see how a batted ball that hits home plate is foul as the entire plate is in fair territory.

Small ball will hurt you

I listened to Coach Harker’s explanation on Dan Scott’s show. Still looks like a dumb move.

Again, virtually the only time a sacrifice bunt makes sense is when you are playing for a single run late in the ball game. Tie game in the 8th with the winning run on first and nobody out; that sort of thing.

It seems especially a bad idea in a offense friendly college environment and certainly with one of your better hitters at the dish.

When your staff / defense is giving up 7 runs per game, things need to be considered differently, ESPECIALLY with regard to bunts in early innings.