Register or Sign In to remove these ads
sd181612

Was that a foul ball?

48 posts in this topic

On 10/31/2016 at 3:47 PM, maven said:

It's both.

Fair or foul? Foul.

Catch or no catch? Catch.

Can it truly be both? I would think it is a caught fly ball that happens to be in foul territory, but it is not a foul ball. It isn't a foul ball until it meets the definition of one.

Also, in the case of a fly ball hitting the foul pole, it becomes dead by rule after it has hit the pole and becomes a 4 base award. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Register or Sign In to remove these ads
On 10/30/2016 at 8:26 PM, sd181612 said:

Right but the rule states that whenever a foul ball touches a player in foul territory or umpire, or any object that is foreign to the field it is be deemed a foul ball. 

In baseball, a foul ball is a batted ball that:[1][2]

  • Settles on foul territory between home and first base or between home and third base, or
  • Bounds past first or third base on or over foul territory, or
  • First falls on foul territory beyond first or third base, or
  • While on or over foul territory, touches the person of an umpire or player, or any object foreign to the natural ground.

This is used to address a foul ball that might go sharp and direct to the catcher, but not the mitt. So, it's not a foul tip (must go sharp and direct to the catchers mitt and caught), and it's not in flight (I believe the approved ruling states it must reach an appreciable height).

 

A ball that is tipped and first touches his protector or mask, for example, is a foul ball.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Mussgrass said:

Can it truly be both? I would think it is a caught fly ball that happens to be in foul territory, but it is not a foul ball. It isn't a foul ball until it meets the definition of one.

Yes, it's a foul ball, as it satisfies the definition of a foul ball: touching a player while (the ball) is over foul ground.

52 minutes ago, Mussgrass said:

Also, in the case of a fly ball hitting the foul pole, it becomes dead by rule after it has hit the pole and becomes a 4 base award. 

Exactly: it becomes fair and dead at the same instant, and for the same reason (striking the "foul" pole).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can it truly be both? I would think it is a caught fly ball that happens to be in foul territory, but it is not a foul ball. It isn't a foul ball until it meets the definition of one.

Also, in the case of a fly ball hitting the foul pole, it becomes dead by rule after it has hit the pole and becomes a 4 base award. 

The definitions in all codes support what maven has described.

Keep in mind, 'foul ball' does not equal 'dead ball.'

And a batted ball must be either fair or foul. One hitting the foul pole is designated as fair by rule. Maven was attempting to show that fair/foul and live/dead are completely separate entities within the rulebook

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ALStripes17 said:

The definitions in all codes support what maven has described.

Keep in mind, 'foul ball' does not equal 'dead ball.'

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

But, keep in mind that I would be technically incorrect to call this a foul ball in a game. That would make it a dead ball, no runners may advance until the ball is put back in play. The ball is very much live in this situation. That is the point I am trying to make. Being caught over foul territory does not make it a foul ball.

Perhaps there is another rule that comes into play, maybe in the definition of an out or a catch? 

I am not trying to be argumentative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Mussgrass said:

But, keep in mind that I would be technically incorrect to call this a foul ball in a game. That would make it a dead ball, no runners may advance until the ball is put back in play. The ball is very much live in this situation. That is the point I am trying to make. Being caught over foul territory does not make it a foul ball.

Perhaps there is another rule that comes into play, maybe in the definition of an out or a catch? 

I am not trying to be argumentative.

You might not be trying to be argumentative, but you seem to be succeeding anyway.

I'll give this one more shot.

A caught foul fly is foul because it satisfies the definition of a foul ball: "A FOUL BALL is a batted ball that ... while on or over foul territory, touches the person of an umpire or player, or any object foreign to the natural ground." (OBR, Definitions of Terms; FED 2-16-1d; all codes agree)

Does a caught foul fly touch a player over foul territory? Yes. Foul ball.

A caught foul fly is live because if fails to satisfy the definition of a dead ball: "The ball becomes dead and runners advance one base, or return to their bases, without liability to be put out, when: (5) A foul ball is not caught, in which case runners return to their bases." (OBR 5.06(c)(5) "Dead Balls"; FED 5-1-1d; all codes agree)

Is a caught foul fly "not caught?" No (sorry for the double negative). Not dead = live ball.

I'm guessing you're confused because our mechanic for most foul balls is to kill it and point foul. But when a foul fly is caught, we just point it foul without killing it (if the catch is not obvious, we should point it foul and then signal the catch). That's because it's both foul and live.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But, keep in mind that I would be technically incorrect to call this a foul ball in a game. That would make it a dead ball, no runners may advance until the ball is put back in play. The ball is very much live in this situation. That is the point I am trying to make. Being caught over foul territory does not make it a foul ball.

Perhaps there is another rule that comes into play, maybe in the definition of an out or a catch? 

I am not trying to be argumentative.

Umpire mechanics are not synonymous with the rulebook definitions. An umpire declaring 'foul ball' verbally is different from the rulebook status of a batted ball. A batted fly ball caught over foul territory is most definitely a foul ball by status and rule... But it is still live.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But, keep in mind that I would be technically incorrect to call this a foul ball in a game. That would make it a dead ball, no runners may advance until the ball is put back in play. The ball is very much live in this situation. That is the point I am trying to make. Being caught over foul territory does not make it a foul ball.

Perhaps there is another rule that comes into play, maybe in the definition of an out or a catch? 

I am not trying to be argumentative.

And if you mean to call this 'foul' verbally by HS standards, you would be incorrect on multiple accounts because calling a catch in foul territory a 'foul' verbally actually does not stop play. This is addressed in 5-1-1h and 2-16-1e. Case play 2.16.1A and B

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Foul ball - dead

Foul Tip - live

Fly ball over foul territory - live

 

We are never gonna agree on this, Maven.  The long fly and tag up was a fly ball caught over foul territory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Foul ball - dead

Foul Tip - live

Fly ball over foul territory - live

 

We are never gonna agree on this, Maven.  The long fly and tag up was a fly ball caught over foul territory.

You don't have to agree. It's in the definitions of every code.

Foul ball = dead? Not in any rule book or mechanics book anywhere

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, ALStripes17 said:

You don't have to agree. It's in the definitions of every code.

Foul ball = dead? Not in any rule book or mechanics book anywhere

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Yes, I know, and agree, but there are either about 270 or 470 flaws to the OBR book depending on whom you speak with, and I'm not going to defend that many flaws that could be so easily fixed if MLB quit treating the OBR book like the Divinely Inspired Bible that is above reproach and should not be tampered with.

It would probably put about 6 interpretation manuals our of circulation as well.

There's no verbal or physical mechanic for a "tentative foul ball" ... we treat it like it's a fair ball until it's touched or stops (on the ground), touched or caught (in the air) or sails into DBT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, I know, and agree, but there are either about 270 or 470 flaws to the OBR book depending on whom you speak with, and I'm not going to defend that many flaws that could be so easily fixed if MLB quit treating the OBR book like the Divinely Inspired Bible that is above reproach and should not be tampered with.

It would probably put about 6 interpretation manuals our of circulation as well.

There's no verbal or physical mechanic for a "tentative foul ball" ... we treat it like it's a fair ball until it's touched or stops (on the ground), touched or caught (in the air) or sails into DBT.

A batted ball touched in flight over foul territory still gets a point mechanic.

I know there are many issues with OBR, but would love to hear all 270 (your conservative number) or maybe 10 of those flaws.

Interpretations would still be necessary. Case precedence still necessary. If there was a tell-all solution, it would be applied. Amazing to see how similar this is to governmental law huh?

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ALStripes17 said:

A batted ball touched in flight over foul territory still gets a point mechanic.

Purely for scoring purposes if it's caught.  FP3 instead of P3.

If it's dropped, you go straight to the TIME! mechanic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Purely for scoring purposes if it's caught.  FP3 instead of P3.

If it's dropped, you go straight to the TIME! mechanic.

Or a batted ball that is touched and bobbled momentarily... The point tells everyone it was touched over whatever ground first. If that ball lands in opposite territory, we have the initial point to give everyone evidence of what we saw. Not purely for scoring.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/9/2016 at 5:21 PM, ALStripes17 said:

I know there are many issues with OBR, but would love to hear all 270 (your conservative number) or maybe 10 of those flaws.

 

I don't have it handy, but they are included in Evan's book (and he might have a list).  Heck, it starts from the very beginning where it says
"baseball is a game played by 9 players" (or whatever the specific wording is).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't have it handy, but they are included in Evan's book (and he might have a list).  Heck, it starts from the very beginning where it says

"baseball is a game played by 9 players" (or whatever the specific wording is).

I've seen it. I just wanted WildFlyer to provide some evidence with it rather than just ramble on :)

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/30/2016 at 8:44 PM, sd181612 said:

I'm watching the game and that fly towards the backstop is hit. Rizzo bounces it off of his hand then off of his glove and catches it. Isn't that supposed to be foul?

Didn't touch anything else. Why would it be foul?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm having trouble understanding why there is so much discussion on this.  Because it is foul does not mean it is a dead ball.

1.This is a foul ball because it was first touched in foul territory.

2. Since nothing happened to cause the ball to become dead, it remains live.

 It is both a foul ball and a live batted ball caught for an out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/9/2016 at 7:39 AM, Mussgrass said:

Can it truly be both? I would think it is a caught fly ball that happens to be in foul territory, but it is not a foul ball. It isn't a foul ball until it meets the definition of one.

Also, in the case of a fly ball hitting the foul pole, it becomes dead by rule after it has hit the pole and becomes a 4 base award. 

It is scored as a foul out, F2-3 in this case.  Fly ball caught to left field is 7.  Fly ball to caught to left field in foul territory is F7.   Alternatively you can do F7 for the fly out, and FO7 for the foul out.   Either way, official scorekeeping recognizes a caught fly ball in foul territory as both an out, and a foul ball (and live).

Lots of fair balls can be dead - batted ball hitting base runner, fan reaching into field of play, fielder hits batted ball with thrown glove, etc.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, beerguy55 said:

It is scored as a foul out, F2-3 in this case.  Fly ball caught to left field is 7.  Fly ball to caught to left field in foul territory is F7.   Alternatively you can do F7 for the fly out, and FO7 for the foul out.   Either way, official scorekeeping recognizes a caught fly ball in foul territory as both an out, and a foul ball (and live).

Lots of fair balls can be dead - batted ball hitting base runner, fan reaching into field of play, fielder hits batted ball with thrown glove, etc.

 

Just to correct one minor thing, a fielder hitting the ball with a thrown glove(detached equipment) is actually delayed dead. Players can try to advance beyond their award base. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what is wrong with this mechanic?

While ball is in the air, point up, if caught, point foul, signal and call the out. If it's not caught, point and call foul. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mister B said:

So what is wrong with this mechanic?

While ball is in the air, point up, if caught, point foul, signal and call the out. If it's not caught, point and call foul. 

Pointing up indicates the infield fly rule.  

If it's caught, it's irrelevant to the players whether the ball was in fair or foul territory.  It's too late to signal that.  The reason we point first is to rule on whether the ball was touched in fair or foul territory in case the ball is not caught.  (Somebody is going to say that we need to tell the scorer, which I find ridiculous.  Do we signal error?  Hit?  Passed ball vs. wild pitch?  None of this is our job, imho.)

You could make a mental note of fair or foul and only signal when the ball is dropped, but there's no real benefit to this and it's just not the way it's done.  Also, if you signal fair or foul immediately when the ball is touched, the runners don't run unnecessarily on a ball you know will be dead if dropped.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By MadMax
      Fired up the AppleTV to watch the video clips of Orlando Arcia scoring from 1B on an infield single and escaping from a 3B-HP rundown (this had to be good!) to discover that the Orioles vs. Brewers game is the Featured Free Game of the Day. When prompted to login (I just have a lapsed, standard account), I noticed that the cost for a Year's Subscription is... only $19.99!!! The monthly is $24.99. This may have been a misprint, but I took a shot, and sure enough, I was charged $19.99 for the rest of the year of premium baseball coverage.
      Happy Independence Day! Watch some baseball!
    • By umpirebrianc
      The 6th Annual East Texas Umpire Clinic is coming Jan 27-29.  Learn from a 2016 World Series Umpire!!! Marvin Hudson is on our staff and will be here again in 2017.  
      Only $115 right now for Fri-Sun - check out www.umpireclinics.com for all the details.  Don't miss an incredible opportunity to learn from incredible instructors at the top of their game to help you better your game.
      Questions email me - umpireclinics@gmail.com
      Brian Chinn
    • By Thunderheads
      Ok, .... please read carefully and hear me out .... 
      I'm a HS umpire and that's all I'll ever be, partly because that's what I enjoy and that's my inspiration.   I don't have the time or schedule to do College ball, so what I do I'm perfectly happy with.  And, to add ....  I do a decent job.
      Now, ... I'll NEVER be at the level of the guys on the field right now, and 99.9999999% of all of us on the site won't either, however.  IF I ever got to do a game at the level of a plate in the world series, I certainly wouldn't have my hands in my pockets most of the night.  I feel Guccione did a fine job last night, no doubt, and he probably accomplished a dream last night by doing his first World Series plate job.   But, did anyone else notice this?  I know it was pretty 'raw' in Cleveland last night but would gloves be a good alternative?   I just think the hands in pockets thing looks as if you don't care.
      Am I off base here, or was this noticed by anyone else?
      Again, I'm not bashing Guccione per-say, but how does that 'look' to others?  Make sense?
      I posted something similar on Facebook and you'd think that I called Guccione's mother a nasty name!  Geez  
      Anyhow, thoughts?
    • By gnhbua93
      http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/53157956/v1057710383/mlb-now-digs-into-robotic-umpires