Ball in bare hand - tags base with glove

[stl_ump]

As the title says...

F3 dives and knocks a line drive down. He scrambles around on the ground for it and gets it in his bare hand but can't get to the base so he dives at the base and tags it with his glove while the ball is firmly in control in his bare hand.

Out?

Thanks

[AllanA]

Yes.

As the title says...

F3 dives and knocks a line drive down. He scrambles around on the ground for it and gets it in his bare hand but can't get to the base so he dives at the base and tags it with his glove while the ball is firmly in control in his bare hand.

Out?

Thanks

[JaxRolo]

The rule book does not say F3 has to touch the base with his foot. It can be any part of the body as long as his holding the ball.

[UmpJM]

As long as he has secure position of the ball in his hand or glove, he can tag the bag with his tongue if he wants to.

That's an out.

JM

[stl_ump]

Any case book references?

We know he can't do this to tag a player... so that would lead me to wonder why he CAN do it on a base?

Thanks

[Mr Umpire]

Any case book references?

We know he can't do this to tag a player... so that we lead me to wonder why he CAN do it on a base?

Thanks

Jim Evans Diamond Challenge Pg. 46

[yawetag]

Any case book references?

We know he can't do this to tag a player... so that we lead me to wonder why he CAN do it on a base?

Thanks

From Fed Rules (emphasis mine):

2-24-1: A force-out is a putout during which a runner who is being forced to advance is tagged out, or is put out by a fielder who holds the ball while touching the base toward which the forced runner is advancing.

2-40(d): Touching is contact with, and there is no distinction between the act of touching or by being touched. The term applies to contact with any part of the person or his clothing if the clothing is reasonably well fitted. This includes: d. a player touching a base, or

2-24-4: A tag out is the put out of a runner, including the batter-runner, who is not in contact with his base when touched with a live ball, or with the glove or hand when the live ball is held securely therein by a fielder. The ball is not considered as having been securely held if it is juggled or dropped after the touching, unless the runner deliberately knocks the ball from the hand of the fielder.

From OBR (emphasis mine):

2.00 A TAG is the action of a fielder in touching a base with his body while holding the ball securely and firmly in his hand or glove; or touching a runner with the ball, or with his hand or glove holding the ball, while holding the ball securely and firmly in his hand or glove. It is not a tag, however, if simultaneously or immediately following his touching a base or touching a runner, the fielder drops the ball. In establishing the validity of the tag, the fielder shall hold the ball long enough to prove that he has complete control of the ball. If the fielder has made a tag and drops the ball while in the act of making a throw following the tag, the tag shall be adjudged to have been made.

From NCAA (emphasis mine):

2-74: TAG: The action of a fielder in touching a base with any part of the body while holding the ball securely and firmly in the hand or glove or touching a runner with the ball or with the glove while holding the ball securely and firmly in that hand or glove. The fielder shall maintain or regain control of his body and if he drops the ball due to his lack of body control or control of the ball, it is not a tag. A voluntary release is substantive proof of complete control.

In effect, to tag a person, you have to have the ball in your hand or glove and touch the runner with whatever is holding the ball (or the ball itself). To tag a base, you only have to have possession of the ball and touch it with any part of your body. I don't have any case plays handy, but I think the rules are clear enough.

[Rich Ives]

Any case book references?

We know he can't do this to tag a player... so that we lead me to wonder why he CAN do it on a base?

Thanks

Read the definition of tag slowly - several times.

[mstaylor]

Look at the force rule and tell me where it says foot, knee, hand or any other body part. It simply says touch the base while holding the ball.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Any case book references?

We know he can't do this to tag a player... so that we lead me to wonder why he CAN do it on a base?

Thanks

Don't be led to believe anything wrong.

It's a good thing to remember.

[carolinablue]

Not trying to hijack but this fits in with this thread pretty good. I remember a debate about this play somewhere a few years ago but can't remember the outcome of it.

Bases loaded, two outs, 2 strikes on the batter. Pitcher throws a curve in the dirt which is swung at for strike three. Catcher blocks ball which deflects from his chest and comes to rest on top of the plate. Batter immediately takes off for 1B. F2 after loosing the ball for a second locates it and picks it up and fires to F3 but the B/R beats the throw.

The question is, when F2 picked the ball up from the plate, is R3( who is a forced runner)out. To me this is an out but for some reason some guys said no.

[yawetag]

The question is, when F2 picked the ball up from the plate, is R3( who is a forced runner)out. To me this is an out but for some reason some guys said no.

Yes, it is. There's no rule that says a force out has to be a purposeful touch. An appeal, on the other hand, DOES require obvious intent.

[Mr Umpire]

Not trying to hijack but this fits in with this thread pretty good. I remember a debate about this play somewhere a few years ago but can't remember the outcome of it.

Bases loaded, two outs, 2 strikes on the batter. Pitcher throws a curve in the dirt which is swung at for strike three. Catcher blocks ball which deflects from his chest and comes to rest on top of the plate. Batter immediately takes off for 1B. F2 after loosing the ball for a second locates it and picks it up and fires to F3 but the B/R beats the throw.

The question is, when F2 picked the ball up from the plate, is R3( who is a forced runner)out. To me this is an out but for some reason some guys said no.

The reason some said no is b/c he didn't have possession until the ball was lifted off the ground. Or, he wasn't tagging the plate. I don't know but I have an out as long as he has control b/c neither argument is valid for me. B/c if he has secure possession to lift the ball without any juggle, I have an out since he had to have it at the time it was on the plate to lift it without juggling. And, an accidental tag is still a tag.

So, I agree with it being an out. The rules don't say it has to be intentional and nothing defines when he gains control as if it has to be 1 inch off the ground before possession is considered.

[noumpere]

The reason some said no is b/c he didn't have possession until the ball was lifted off the ground. Or, he wasn't tagging the plate. I don't know but I have an out as long as he has control b/c neither argument is valid for me. B/c if he has secure possession to lift the ball without any juggle, I have an out since he had to have it at the time it was on the plate to lift it without juggling. And, an accidental tag is still a tag.

So, I agree with it being an out. The rules don't say it has to be intentional and nothing defines when he gains control as if it has to be 1 inch off the ground before possession is considered.

The reason some said it was not an out is because the rule on tagging the base does not include tagging the base with the ball. So if your a rule book lawyer type umpire you might enforce that. I agree with you that I would have an out if this situation happened in a game.

And, I cant remember if this rule has been changed to sllow tagging of the base with the ball but I know it didnt used to allow it.

[mstaylor]

Sure you can tag a base with the ball.

[stl_ump]

Any case book references?

We know he can't do this to tag a player... so that we lead me to wonder why he CAN do it on a base?

Thanks

...In effect, to tag a person, you have to have the ball in your hand or glove and touch the runner with whatever is holding the ball (or the ball itself). To tag a base, you only have to have possession of the ball and touch it with any part of your body. I don't have any case plays handy, but I think the rules are clear enough.

But it could be argued that the glove is NOT part of the body. Not that I'd argue that but some could...:shrug:

[noumpere]

Sure you can tag a base with the ball.

Its unclear who you are responding to, but from the MLB web page heres the definition of tagging a base:

A TAG is the action of a fielder in touching a base with his body while holding the

ball securely and firmly in his hand or glove

and it doesnt include tagging the base with the ball - but it should and is called that way.

[UmpJM]

stl_ump,

I agree that it would have been better if they had said "person" instead of "body" - because that would eliminate the opportunity for the specious argument.

JM

[carolinablue]

"Specious". Excellent, I had to look that one up. Some of you guys have a heck of a vocabulary. I feel smarter now. LOL

[Rich Ives]

But it could be argued that the glove is NOT part of the body. Not that I'd argue that but some could...

Well then neither is a shoe.

[BigUmp56]

But it could be argued that the glove is NOT part of the body. Not that I'd argue that but some could...

Well then neither is a shoe.

So, you're saying that fielders don't have to put the ball in their shoe to tag a base?

Tim.

[UmpTTS43]

As long as the equipment and uniform are worn properly, they are considered a part of the "person". For example, tagging first base with an empty glove, worn on the hand, is acceptable for a tag out. A player using his cap to gain extra length in tagging first base is not acceptable.

[JaxRolo]

Sure you can tag a base with the ball.

Its unclear who you are responding to, but from the MLB web page heres the definition of tagging a base:

A TAG is the action of a fielder in touching a base with his body while holding the

ball securely and firmly in his hand or glove

and it doesnt include tagging the base with the ball - but it should and is called that way.

If a coach wants to argue that he may find himself in the parking lot fairly quick

[Rich Ives]

But it could be argued that the glove is NOT part of the body. Not that I'd argue that but some could...

Well then neither is a shoe.

So, you're saying that fielders don't have to put the ball in their shoe to tag a base?

Tim.

Nah - just that they don't have to remove the shoe and sock to tag the base. :angel4:

[BigSimonia]

But it could be argued that the glove is NOT part of the body. Not that I'd argue that but some could...

Well then neither is a shoe.

Normally, I find Rich's comments to have a "grumpy old man" quality to them. But this was spot on and made me laugh to boot.