Fielder swats ball over fence - home run?

[Guest Goroon Farrow]

Did the umpire make the correct call (home run) on the play where Mike Mahtook tried to barehand the ball that had bounced twice on top of the wall and came back in - only to accidentally swat the ball over the wall? Since the ball actually came back into the field of play, I wonder if the batter should have gotten only two bases.

[Richvee]

This has been discussed at length on other treads here. As far as I can tell there's no consensus, and we can't find a definitive cite in the rules, manuals, etc.

Personally, I side with the ruling that , since the ball was indeed headed back into the field of play without clearing the fence, , then deflected over the wall,it should have been a double. Some will agree, others will not.

[timelydew]

17 hours ago, Richvee said:

This has been discussed at length on other treads here. As far as I can tell there's no consensus, and we can't find a definitive cite in the rules, manuals, etc.

Personally, I side with the ruling that , since the ball was indeed headed back into the field of play without clearing the fence, , then deflected over the wall,it should have been a double. Some will agree, others will not.

I'm willing to see both sides of the argument. The one for awarding two bases (which I initially believed to be 100% correct) is a good one, but lacks any anecdotal evidence to support besides a few claims on message boards. The argument for supporting HR is based on logic and simplicity, and it's honestly the one I'm leaning toward. The lack of uproar around the call leads me to believe it should be deemed a HR. I've researched this issue more than anyone - I made the original thread about it here and at umpire.org. I still don't know however.

[Richvee]

1 hour ago, timelydew said:

I'm willing to see both sides of the argument. The one for awarding two bases (which I initially believed to be 100% correct) is a good one, but lacks any anecdotal evidence to support besides a few claims on message boards. The argument for supporting HR is based on logic and simplicity, and it's honestly the one I'm leaning toward. The lack of uproar around the call leads me to believe it should be deemed a HR. I've researched this issue more than anyone - I made the original thread about it here and at umpire.org. I still don't know however.

I guess the biggest issue is "Is it different if the ball returns towards the field after hitting the TOP of the wall. We all agree if it hits the fence, ricochets back and off the fielder then over the fence we have a double. 

Chances are I'll never see it in one of my games, so I'm not overly concerned, but would love to see an official interp.  

[timelydew]

21 hours ago, Richvee said:

I guess the biggest issue is "Is it different if the ball returns towards the field after hitting the TOP of the wall. We all agree if it hits the fence, ricochets back and off the fielder then over the fence we have a double. 

Chances are I'll never see it in one of my games, so I'm not overly concerned, but would love to see an official interp.  

• Matt Green‏ @atomikdestrukt  Sep 13

  
  

  @CloseCallSports If ball strikes TOP of OF wall and subsequently deflects out off of leaping outfielder, home run or two base award?

   

Gil Imber‏ @Gilimber

Follow

Replying to @atomikdestrukt @CloseCallSports

Home run if in fair territory, and two bases if the ball is deflected out of play outside the foul lines. Same as batted ball in flight.

[timelydew]

That reply above is from the dude who runs Close Call Sports. In my original tweet I specified that I was talking about the Ramirez/Mahtook play in the replies. That site is like a bible for rule obscurities. I don't trust everything I read but it's almost an unimpeachable source. I asked if it mattered what direction the ball took off the bounce (ie, back toward the field) in reply to that. I'm beginning to doubt that it matters, though.

[Larry in TN]

I have two questions about the scenario.

1. Is the top of the fence within the field of play or out?

2. Assuming it is "in play", is a batted-ball which hits the top of the fence then deflects back toward a fielder still "in flight"?

 

If the answer to #1 is no, then wouldn't it be a home run?

If the answer to #1 is yes, then it would depend on #2.  I can't see how the ball can remain "in flight" after hitting the top of the fence, absent some ground rule, since that isn't a fielder or his equipment.  If it is no long "in flight" then a home run (award) is no longer possible based on subsequent status of the ball.

 

What am I missing?

 

[Gfoley4]

45 minutes ago, Larry in TN said:

I have two questions about the scenario.

1. Is the top of the fence within the field of play or out?

2. Assuming it is "in play", is a batted-ball which hits the top of the fence then deflects back toward a fielder still "in flight"?

 

If the answer to #1 is no, then wouldn't it be a home run?

If the answer to #1 is yes, then it would depend on #2.  I can't see how the ball can remain "in flight" after hitting the top of the fence, absent some ground rule, since that isn't a fielder or his equipment.  If it is no long "in flight" then a home run (award) is no longer possible based on subsequent status of the ball.

 

What am I missing?

 

I can answer your first question. The top of the fence is within play. (Both Comerica Park and the G-Rate don't have any ground rules regarding this)

 

[Richvee]

1 hour ago, Gfoley4 said:

I can answer your first question. The top of the fence is within play. (Both Comerica Park and the G-Rate don't have any ground rules regarding this)

 

So is Gil saying if F7 in this clip somehow misplayed that bounce and the ball went over the fence it's a HR? I understand if he reached on top of the wall and the knocked the ball over, HR, but I'm having trouble saying HR if it bounced BACK into the field, fielder CHANGES the direction of the bounce off the wall, and back over.  

[Larry in TN]

Okay, so the bounced-ball is no longer "in flight" so it can no longer go over the fence in flight.  Is it that simple?

[Tborze]

What I have come to understand is a batted ball which hits the TOP of the wall is still considered to be "in flight" for the purpose of this situation with the exception that it cannot be caught for an out, but can still become a HR due to its "in flight" status.  

My original thinking was since it didn't meet the definition of a HR due to the ball losing its in flight status once hitting the wall and not going over it, it had to be a GRD.  Considering the ball still "in flight" off the top of the wall makes it easier, which I believe Mr. Carl Childress was addressing back in 2011 (I believe) on another board.  

What Gil said seems to be the correct ruling.  

 

[timelydew]

2 hours ago, Tborze said:

What I have come to understand is a batted ball which hits the TOP of the wall is still considered to be "in flight" for the purpose of this situation with the exception that it cannot be caught for an out, but can still become a HR due to its "in flight" status.  

My original thinking was since it didn't meet the definition of a HR due to the ball losing its in flight status once hitting the wall and not going over it, it had to be a GRD.  Considering the ball still "in flight" off the top of the wall makes it easier, which I believe Mr. Carl Childress was addressing back in 2011 (I believe) on another board.  

What Gil said seems to be the correct ruling.  

 

Yep. I asked him  if it mattered which direction the bounce takes:

 

Gil Imber‏ @Gilimber  23h23 hours ago

More

Replying to @atomikdestrukt @CloseCallSports

No; top of the wall is treated as a hybrid in that a caught ball off the wall isn't an out, but is "in flight" for purposes of deciding HR.

[Richvee]

8 hours ago, timelydew said:

Yep. I asked him  if it mattered which direction the bounce takes:

 

Gil Imber‏ @Gilimber  23h23 hours ago

More

Replying to @atomikdestrukt @CloseCallSports

No; top of the wall is treated as a hybrid in that a caught ball off the wall isn't an out, but is "in flight" for purposes of deciding HR.

Ok. I get it. Now let's add the kicker..

Same for all codes?

[Jimurray]

12 hours ago, Richvee said:

Ok. I get it. Now let's add the kicker..

Same for all codes?

Probably not in FED. But the caseplay does not specify the top of the fence. 

"8.3.3 SITUATION H:

B1 hits a long fly ball to left field. F7 goes back to the fence, leaps, but is not able to touch the fly ball. The ball then rebounds off the fence, strikes the fielder’s glove and ricochets over the fence in fair territory. Is this a home run or ground-rule double?

RULING: This would be considered a ground-rule double. To be a home run, the ball must clear the fence in flight. Action secondary to the hit (ball ricocheting off the fence and then off the fielder’s glove) caused the ball to go into dead-ball area. Therefore, the hit shall be ruled a ground-rule double."

[beerguy55]

On 9/16/2017 at 2:42 PM, Larry in TN said:

I have two questions about the scenario.

1. Is the top of the fence within the field of play or out?

2. Assuming it is "in play", is a batted-ball which hits the top of the fence then deflects back toward a fielder still "in flight"?

 

If the answer to #1 is no, then wouldn't it be a home run?

If the answer to #1 is yes, then it would depend on #2.  I can't see how the ball can remain "in flight" after hitting the top of the fence, absent some ground rule, since that isn't a fielder or his equipment.  If it is no long "in flight" then a home run (award) is no longer possible based on subsequent status of the ball.

 

What am I missing?

 

The answer is it's both.

If a ball hits the top of the wall and then continues over the fence it is a home run - it is ruled to have left the park "in flight"....this has been witnessed countless times in MLB.

If a ball hits the top of the wall and is "caught" by the outfielder it is not an out.  It was not caught "in flight".  But it is indeed live, and play on.   Batter can get a triple out of it...or get thrown out...or whatever.

So, the top of the wall seems to be the Phantom Zone.

It has also been ruled that a ball that comes to rest on top of the wall is a two-base award from TOP.

So, I'd like to know what happens if the wall is 50 feet wide.

[Richvee]

4 hours ago, Jimurray said:

Probably not in FED. But the caseplay does not specify the top of the fence. 

"8.3.3 SITUATION H:

B1 hits a long fly ball to left field. F7 goes back to the fence, leaps, but is not able to touch the fly ball. The ball then rebounds off the fence, strikes the fielder’s glove and ricochets over the fence in fair territory. Is this a home run or ground-rule double?

RULING: This would be considered a ground-rule double. To be a home run, the ball must clear the fence in flight. Action secondary to the hit (ball ricocheting off the fence and then off the fielder’s glove) caused the ball to go into dead-ball area. Therefore, the hit shall be ruled a ground-rule double."

This, I believe is the same in all codes. It's the "Top of the wall" thing that seems to be the grey area in all of this. 

[Senor Azul]

According to the 2016 BRD, all three codes have the following interpretation:

“It is a home run if a batted ball hits on top of the outfield fence and then bounds over in fair territory.”

That is the official interpretation of the NFHS since 1985 handed down by Brad Rumble. In NCAA it has actually been incorporated into the rule book and can be found at rule 7-6 AR 2.

 

 

[beerguy55]

56 minutes ago, Richvee said:

This, I believe is the same in all codes. It's the "Top of the wall" thing that seems to be the grey area in all of this. 

Standards might help...as it is the "top" of the wall could be the width of a chain link fence, or a 1/8" board, or a 6-12" chunk of padding...or a few dozen other likely scenarios.

MLB can solve it easily - yellow line...anything hitting/passing above the yellow line (including, or not, the line) is out, anything hitting below is in, and no longer in flight.   Bit of a different approach everywhere else.

So, I think simplest makes the most sense.

Any batted ball that goes over the wall in flight in fair territory, is a HR, including in flight batted balls that hit the top of the wall and/or the fielder(s), in any order.  A ball that comes to rest on top of the wall should be treated like a ball that becomes lodged in the wall.  The ball is ruled to have gone over the wall when it touches any object beyond the top of the wall, including the back of the wall.   Any ball that goes beyond The Wall is the property of the Night King.

[Jimurray]

2 hours ago, Richvee said:

This, I believe is the same in all codes. It's the "Top of the wall" thing that seems to be the grey area in all of this. 

You would have to read some things into the FED caseplay which would make it the same as the OP. I picture a fielder jumping to catch the fly ball which goes over his glove and hits the top of the fence (chain link with or without padding or solid surface with or without padding) and rebounds toward the field while the airborne fielder still has his glove outstretched inside live ball territory. The ball hits the glove and then goes over the fence due to the geometry of where it hit or due to movement of the fielder's glove. In FED I have a book rule double. In OBR I believe they want it called a HR.

[Richvee]

5 hours ago, Jimurray said:

You would have to read some things into the FED caseplay which would make it the same as the OP. I picture a fielder jumping to catch the fly ball which goes over his glove and hits the top of the fence (chain link with or without padding or solid surface with or without padding) and rebounds toward the field while the airborne fielder still has his glove outstretched inside live ball territory. The ball hits the glove and then goes over the fence due to the geometry of where it hit or due to movement of the fielder's glove. In FED I have a book rule double. In OBR I believe they want it called a HR.

I can buy that reasoning.

[beerguy55]

15 hours ago, Jimurray said:

You would have to read some things into the FED caseplay which would make it the same as the OP. I picture a fielder jumping to catch the fly ball which goes over his glove and hits the top of the fence (chain link with or without padding or solid surface with or without padding) and rebounds toward the field while the airborne fielder still has his glove outstretched inside live ball territory. The ball hits the glove and then goes over the fence due to the geometry of where it hit or due to movement of the fielder's glove. In FED I have a book rule double. In OBR I believe they want it called a HR.

Which, ironically, puts the amateur ump in the position to make the more difficult call, because now he has to determine whether or not the glove caused the ball to go over the fence, or that the ball would have gone over anyway - in your example, if the fielder's glove is on the other side of the wall when the ball bounces off the top of the fence then makes contact with the glove.  Easy to see contact with the glove...much harder to determine cause and effect for a two man crew.  The MLB ump doesn't have to make that determination, though he is likely more able to do so for a number of reasons.